七叶树和投票箱分区:当民主是一件危险的事情

D. Callies
{"title":"七叶树和投票箱分区:当民主是一件危险的事情","authors":"D. Callies","doi":"10.1080/00947598.2003.10394554","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract For the second time in a quarter of a century, the U.S. Supreme Court has reversed the Ohio Supreme Court in a ballot box zoning case. In the first, City of Eastlake v. Forest City Enterprises, the Court held that exercising the referendum power to return a parcel zoned multifamily by the Eastlake city council to its previous commercial classification was not a denial of due process by means of a standardless delegation of power from the state legislature to the people of Eastlake. This was because the people retained in the Ohio State Constitution the power to zone through the ballot box. So there was no delegation at all—standardless or otherwise. Twenty-seven years later, in City of Cuyahoga Falls v. Buckeye Community Hope Foundation, the Court finds that a referendum on a specific project site plan likewise passes due process scrutiny: “The subjection of the site-plan ordinance to the City's referendum process, regardless of whether that ordinance reflected an administrative or legislative decision, did not constitute per se arbitrary government conduct in violation of due process.”","PeriodicalId":154411,"journal":{"name":"Land Use Law & Zoning Digest","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Buckeye and Ballot Box Zoning: When Democracy is a Dangerous Thing\",\"authors\":\"D. Callies\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00947598.2003.10394554\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract For the second time in a quarter of a century, the U.S. Supreme Court has reversed the Ohio Supreme Court in a ballot box zoning case. In the first, City of Eastlake v. Forest City Enterprises, the Court held that exercising the referendum power to return a parcel zoned multifamily by the Eastlake city council to its previous commercial classification was not a denial of due process by means of a standardless delegation of power from the state legislature to the people of Eastlake. This was because the people retained in the Ohio State Constitution the power to zone through the ballot box. So there was no delegation at all—standardless or otherwise. Twenty-seven years later, in City of Cuyahoga Falls v. Buckeye Community Hope Foundation, the Court finds that a referendum on a specific project site plan likewise passes due process scrutiny: “The subjection of the site-plan ordinance to the City's referendum process, regardless of whether that ordinance reflected an administrative or legislative decision, did not constitute per se arbitrary government conduct in violation of due process.”\",\"PeriodicalId\":154411,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Land Use Law & Zoning Digest\",\"volume\":\"2 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2003-07-01\",\"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/10.1080/00947598.2003.10394554\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Land Use Law & Zoning Digest","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00947598.2003.10394554","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

美国最高法院在一个投票箱分区案中第二次推翻了俄亥俄州最高法院的判决,这是25年来的第二次。在第一起案件“东湖市诉森林城市企业案”中,法院认为,行使全民公决权,将东湖市议会划为多户家庭的地块恢复到以前的商业分类,并不构成通过州立法机关向东湖人民无标准地授权而否认正当程序。这是因为人们在俄亥俄州宪法中保留了通过投票箱进行分区的权力。所以根本就没有委派——不管有没有标准。27年后,在凯霍加瀑布市诉七叶树社区希望基金会案中,法院认定对具体项目场地规划的公民投票同样通过了正当程序审查:“场地规划条例服从于城市公民投票程序,无论该条例是否反映了行政或立法决定,其本身并不构成违反正当程序的任意政府行为。”
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Buckeye and Ballot Box Zoning: When Democracy is a Dangerous Thing
Abstract For the second time in a quarter of a century, the U.S. Supreme Court has reversed the Ohio Supreme Court in a ballot box zoning case. In the first, City of Eastlake v. Forest City Enterprises, the Court held that exercising the referendum power to return a parcel zoned multifamily by the Eastlake city council to its previous commercial classification was not a denial of due process by means of a standardless delegation of power from the state legislature to the people of Eastlake. This was because the people retained in the Ohio State Constitution the power to zone through the ballot box. So there was no delegation at all—standardless or otherwise. Twenty-seven years later, in City of Cuyahoga Falls v. Buckeye Community Hope Foundation, the Court finds that a referendum on a specific project site plan likewise passes due process scrutiny: “The subjection of the site-plan ordinance to the City's referendum process, regardless of whether that ordinance reflected an administrative or legislative decision, did not constitute per se arbitrary government conduct in violation of due process.”
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信