翻訳と辞書 Words near each other ・ Tahoe Miss ・ Tahoe National Forest ・ Tahoe Park Association ・ Tahoe Park, Sacramento, California ・ Tahoe Pines, California ・ Tahoe Regional Planning Agency ・ Tahoe Reno Industrial Center ・ Tahoe Resources ・ Tahoe Rim Trail ・ Tahoe Smokeless ・ Tahoe Station ・ Tahoe Tessie ・ Tahoe Valley, California ・ Tahoe Vista, California ・ Tahoe-LAFS ・ Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency ・ Tahoe-Truckee Unified School District ・ Tahoe-Yosemite Trail ・ Tahoera'a Huiraatira ・ Tahoka Freeway ・ Tahoka Independent School District ・ Tahoka, Texas ・ Taholah, Washington ・ Tahoma ・ Tahoma (typeface) ・ Tahoma Glacier ・ Tahoma National Cemetery ・ Tahoma School District ・ Tahoma Senior High School ・ Tahoma Vista Comfort Station Dictionary Lists mini英和辞書 mini和英辞書 Webster 1913 Latin-English FOLDOC Wikipedia English ウィキペディア

翻訳と辞書　辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ] スポンサード リンク Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency ： ウィキペディア英語版 Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency ''Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency'', 535 U.S. 302 (2002), is one of the United States Supreme Court's more recent interpretations of the Takings Clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. The case dealt with the question of whether a moratorium on construction of individual homes imposed by the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency fell under the Takings Clause of the United States Constitution and whether the landowners therefore should receive just compensation as required by that clause. The Tahoe Regional Planning Agency was represented by future Chief Justice John Roberts. Justice John Paul Stevens wrote the opinion of the Court, finding that the moratorium did not constitute a taking. It reasoned that there was an inherent difference between the acquisition of property for public use and the regulation of property from private use. The majority concluded that the moratorium at issue in this case should be classified as a regulation of property from private use and therefore no compensation was required. ==Facts of the case== Lake Tahoe Basin falls within both California and Nevada. Those two states created the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRPA) to plan the development of the basin. Between 1981-1984 the TRPA issued two moratoriums on virtually all residential development within the basin. The first moratorium lasted roughly 24 months and the second lasted about 8 months until the TRPA had adopted its comprehensive land-use plan. The plaintiffs in the case were a group of persons who owned individual home sites within the jurisdiction of the TRPA and were therefore subject to the moratoria. The plaintiffs were challenging the law on the grounds that by denying the use of their land, the moratoria issued by the TRPA were in fact takings as described by the Takings Clause of the US Constitution in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments and that therefore they should receive just compensation. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.