Two Wrongs? Correcting Professor Lazarus's Misunderstanding of the Public Trust Doctrine

M. Blumm
{"title":"Two Wrongs? Correcting Professor Lazarus's Misunderstanding of the Public Trust Doctrine","authors":"M. Blumm","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2735147","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper responds to Professor Richard Lazarus's recent and longstanding criticisms of the public trust doctrine (PTD). I claim Richard misunderstands the non-absolutist nature of the doctrine, which seeks accommodation between public and private property. Although he acknowledges the value of the PTD as a defense to claims of private takings, he thinks that the \"background principles\" defense it affords government regulators is a static doctrine. And he fails to see that the PTD hardly equips courts with the authority to displace legislative and administrative decision makers. Instead, as epitomized in the well-known Mono Lake decision, the doctrine -- an inherent limit on all sovereigns -- requires those more representative branches to exercise their discretion in protecting trust resources from destruction or monopolization.","PeriodicalId":81171,"journal":{"name":"Environmental law (Northwestern School of Law)","volume":"46 1","pages":"481"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2139/SSRN.2735147","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental law (Northwestern School of Law)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2735147","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

This paper responds to Professor Richard Lazarus's recent and longstanding criticisms of the public trust doctrine (PTD). I claim Richard misunderstands the non-absolutist nature of the doctrine, which seeks accommodation between public and private property. Although he acknowledges the value of the PTD as a defense to claims of private takings, he thinks that the "background principles" defense it affords government regulators is a static doctrine. And he fails to see that the PTD hardly equips courts with the authority to displace legislative and administrative decision makers. Instead, as epitomized in the well-known Mono Lake decision, the doctrine -- an inherent limit on all sovereigns -- requires those more representative branches to exercise their discretion in protecting trust resources from destruction or monopolization.
两个错误?纠正拉撒路教授对公共信托原则的误解
本文回应了Richard Lazarus教授最近和长期以来对公共信托原则(PTD)的批评。我认为理查德误解了该学说的非绝对主义本质,即寻求公私财产之间的调和。尽管他承认PTD作为对私人征收主张的辩护的价值,但他认为它为政府监管机构提供的“背景原则”辩护是一种静态的原则。而且他没有看到,PTD很难赋予法院取代立法和行政决策者的权力。相反,正如著名的莫诺湖案判决所体现的那样,这一原则——对所有主权的固有限制——要求那些更具代表性的分支机构行使自由裁量权,保护信托资源不受破坏或垄断。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信