Hyde Park’s Two Turns in the Takings Clause Spotlight
本文回顾了1878年最高法院Fertilizing Company v. Hyde Park案，该案确立了政府依警察权使财产变得无价值时无需补偿的原则，并探讨其对现代诉讼及Horne案后财产分类问题的影响。
This essay tells the mostly forgotten story of Fertilizing Company v. Hyde Park, a foundational 1878 Supreme Court decision that explains the relationship between the police power and the takings clause. Fertilizing Company holds that when the government renders newly contraband property valueless pursuant to the police power, the state need not compensate its owner. That principle remains decisive in contemporary litigation involving prohibitions on bump stocks and gambling devices. Moreover, by closely scrutinizing Fertilizing Company, we can answer questions that emerged after the Supreme Court’s 2015 decision in Horne v. Department of Agriculture stated that real and personal property are to be treated identically when property is physically appropriated but differently when property’s value is reduced by regulations. The essay concludes by critiquing Richard Epstein’s scholarship on Fertilizing Company and by exploring the relationship between that case and the subsequent development of the University of Chicago’s future home.