Lucas Limited and Penn Central Promoted

Abstract

Abstract The Supreme Court made three key rulings in the Tahoe-Sierra moratorium case: First, a temporary moratorium on all land-use development is not a per se facial taking; rather, the Penn Central balancing test (public purpose versus private impact) should be applied on an ad hoc, case-by-case basis to determine if a temporary restriction on use effects a regulatory taking. Second, a takings analysis should be focused on the “parcel as a whole” and not just the regulated portion of the parcel, both geographically and temporally. Third, the categorical (or per se) Lucas rule of denial of all use of property is limited to situations when the use restriction is applied permanently.