{"title":"The Shame of Planners","authors":"M. M. Berger","doi":"10.1080/00947598.2002.10394767","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract It has been more than two decades since the late Supreme Court Justice William Brennan challenged the planning profession with his famous query: “If a policeman must know the Constitution, then why not a planner?” (San Diego Gas & Elec. Co. v. City of San Diego, 450 U.S. 621, 661, n. 26 [1981].) It's not that Justice Brennan was unsympathetic to the goals and tribulations of land-use planners. After all, his constitutional gauntlet was thrown down shortly after he had authored the Court's opinion in Penn Central (undoubtedly lauded in some of the other commentaries in this issue, as it was by the Tahoe-Sierra majority) upholding New York City's Landmarks Preservation Law.","PeriodicalId":154411,"journal":{"name":"Land Use Law & Zoning Digest","volume":"101 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Land Use Law & Zoning Digest","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00947598.2002.10394767","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract It has been more than two decades since the late Supreme Court Justice William Brennan challenged the planning profession with his famous query: “If a policeman must know the Constitution, then why not a planner?” (San Diego Gas & Elec. Co. v. City of San Diego, 450 U.S. 621, 661, n. 26 [1981].) It's not that Justice Brennan was unsympathetic to the goals and tribulations of land-use planners. After all, his constitutional gauntlet was thrown down shortly after he had authored the Court's opinion in Penn Central (undoubtedly lauded in some of the other commentaries in this issue, as it was by the Tahoe-Sierra majority) upholding New York City's Landmarks Preservation Law.
二十多年前,美国最高法院(Supreme Court)已故大法官威廉•布伦南(William Brennan)提出了一个著名的质疑:“如果警察必须了解宪法,那么规划师为什么就不了解呢?”(圣地亚哥燃气和电力公司诉圣地亚哥市,450 U.S. 621, 661, n. 26[1981]。)这并不是说布伦南法官不同情土地使用规划者的目标和苦难。毕竟,他的宪法挑战是在他撰写宾夕法尼亚中央法院的意见后不久被推翻的(毫无疑问,在这个问题上的其他一些评论中受到赞扬,就像塔霍-塞拉多数人一样),支持纽约市的地标保护法。