| Main Menu
|
|
Lost your password?
No problem!
Just type your user name and click the Send button, and an e-mail message will be sent to you with a 'confirmation code'. After you receive the confirmation code, re-type your user name and the 'confirmation code' into this form. After this form has been submitted, a new password will be generated and mailed to you.
|
|
Now showing!
Shaw v Santa Cruz County: Shaw Appeals
Disincentives preclude innovation
“Because of the Endangered Species Act—what developer or land owner would want to purchase or own the land and do what we are doing? Disincentives preclude innovation. It is no wonder that no one else is following this common sense formulation for success: Pull the weeds and manage the plants and the hydrology.”
- Michael Shaw
Liberty Garden takes on confiscatory court ruling
“Twenty-five years ago, the Court posited that a regulation of private property ‘effects a taking if [it] does not substantially advance [a] legitimate state interes[t]... Today we correct course. We hold that the ‘substantially advances’ formula is not a valid takings test, and indeed conclude that it has no proper place in our takings jurisprudence.”
-Ron Zumbrun
Read more>
Login
|