Blog, News, Uncategorized
Guggenheim v. City of Goleta
July 19, 2010 by parkguy1 · 3 Comments
As a follow up to my earlier Guggenheim v. City of Goleta post, the decision now being heard En Banc was argued and submitted on June 22, 2010. This decision is clearly of major importance to all rent control park Owners. The brief submitted to the court by the City of Goleta, arguing to overturn the decision can be read here.
Richard A. Epstein (University of Chicago – Law School) has posted “Takings Made hard.” Here is the abstract:
- “The novel opinion of Ninth Circuit Judge Jay Bybee in Guggenheim v. City of Goleta could threaten the tortured jurisprudence that has protected regulatory takings and other property rights infringements from Fifth Amendment challenges. This article describes that jurisprudence, explains the economic and legal thinking underlying Judge Bybee’s opinion, and identifies a number of technical deficiencies with his opinion. The Supreme Court will likely take up an appeal of Judge Bybee’s opinion; hopefully it will use that opportunity to correct the Court’s many errors that have eroded property rights.”
- Read the full article here.
“The novel opinion of Ninth Circuit Judge Jay Bybee in Guggenheim v. City of Goleta could threaten the tortured jurisprudence that has protected regulatory takings and other property rights infringements from Fifth Amendment challenges.” Please! Don’t use the words “tortured” and “Bybee” in the same sentence unless you mean “tortured.”
Your point is well taken. That was a quote and I have corrected the post with quotation marks. Obviously, Richard Epstein used the word “tortured” to discuss a “takings” ruling BECAUSE it was a Bybee decision.
Yes, the author clearly used the word “tortured” tongue-in-cheek, to describe the decision for the following reason–
Bybee, as a member of the GW Bush justice department, was one of the authors of the memos allowing torture.
For that act, he was awarded a lifetime federal judgeship on the ninth circuit court of appeals,. by GWB.
Now we all have to be tortured by his absurd decisions, such as the ridiculous decision he wrote overturning decades of rulings on rent control. (How come folks on the right only complain about “activist judges” when the “activism” is perceived by them to be from the other side? This G v G decision of Bybee was judicial activism to the nth degree!)
Good that the other judges on the panel saw the problems with his decision, and have decided to hear the case “en banc”, which they rarely agree to do.
Does anyone know how the “en banc” case is going? When is a decision expected?