Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 26, No. 1, p. 259-286 : Lessons from Oregon’s Battle over Measure 37 and Measure 49: Applying the Reserved Powers Doctrine to Defend State Land Use Regulations
Dateien
Datum
2011
Autor:innen
Zeitschriftentitel
ISSN der Zeitschrift
Bandtitel
Verlag
University of Oregon School of Law
Zusammenfassung
Part I provides a brief introduction to Oregon’s expansive land use
system. Part II then discusses the revolt against Oregon’s system that
resulted from the state’s approach to private land use regulation. One
way that voters expressed their frustration towards state land use
regulations was by passing Measure 37. However, the public quickly
realized the massive ramifications associated with Measure 37 and
passed Measure 49. Part III explores both Citizens for Constitutional
Fairness v. Jackson County decisions, introduces the Contract Clause
of the United States Constitution, and describes how the district and
appellate courts applied the Contract Clause to formulate their
conclusions. Citizens I concluded that the land use regulation waivers
granted pursuant to Measure 37 were binding, irrevocable contracts
that could not be subsequently altered by Measure 49, while Citizens
II interpreted these waivers to be fully revocable. Finally, Part IV
discusses the reserved powers doctrine as alternative grounds for
limiting the scope of Measure 37 and similar state initiatives across
the country. The reserved powers doctrine, a common law tool crafted by the Supreme Court of the United States to protect a state’s ability
to enact legislation necessary to preserve the public welfare, allows a
state to modify or rescind existing contracts that interfere with its
ability to exercise essential sovereign responsibilities. Since
enacting legislation that ensures proper land use is an essential state
responsibility, the reserved powers doctrine is a powerful, yet
unexplored, method for protecting important state land use
regulations—and ultimately, the public interest.
Beschreibung
28 pages
Schlagwörter
Land use -- Law and legislation -- Oregon
Zitierform
26 J. ENVTL. L. & LITIG. 259 (2011)