business feedback
do327
feedback_bus1.docxLocate and discuss a recent newspaper or internet article concerning a dispute over real or personal property rights. Include the citation or link for your article.
I choose an article printed in the LA Times that led me to search more about this Supreme Court case. The dispute is referring to personal property rights. The article is about a coupled named Mike and Chantell Sackett who always dreamed of living on a lake house in Idaho. Unfortunately when this couple was in the market looking for a home they could not afford a beautiful lake house to live in. Mike and Chantell later found a perfect empty residential lot across the road of an Idaho Lake where they would plan to build their home, the land they had bought gave them a perfect view of the lake and put them in their price category. As the Sacketts begin to plan their building they were told by the Environmental Protection Agency they cannot build on their personal property because it possibly might be an off-limits for building lot. The EPA said it may be a wetland area and then restricted them from ever building on their land basically taking their rights as property owners. After a four year battle the Sacketts were ruled in a supreme court On March 21 2012, with a 9-0 vote, that landowners have a right to direct, meaningful judicial review if the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency effectively seizes control of their property by declaring it to be “wetlands.” After their win the Sacketts finally were granted the right to build their dream home across the Idaho Lake. I have attached the LA Article, the Legal article, and a YouTube break down of the Case. Furthermore I am happy for the sacketts in their victory and I hope no one ever has to go through something like this so time consuming and difficult.
http://articles.latimes.com/keyword/property-rights
http://www.pacificlegal.org/Sackett
FEEDBACK:
The topic i choose was titled Speech vs. property rights. THis article was about a man named Dennis Abel who was arrested for what he says was exercising his 1st Amendment right the reason he was arrested is because he called himself making the start of 2003 Iraq war by throwing his blood at a Vanderberg Air Force Base sign. This was his 2nd trespassing arrest therefore military banned him from protesting in the area, he was even banned from an area that was specifically set aside for peaceful public protesting. This case reached the Supreme Court and the decision that was made is that the military may control protests on its land, even in areas that are used for public schools and highways. The Justices said the case was a matter of property law, not the 1st Amendment and this was also the argument between Abel's attorney an the State. They noted the federal law that makes it a crime to reenter a military installation after being banned by the Commander.
http://newsmilitary.com/pages/20622025-case-of-longtime-vandenberg-protester-reaches-supreme-court
FEEDBACK:
