The important thing to understand, some people in the land use context do assert that they should have the right to the highest and best economic use of their property, but they do not, and they should not. Zoning has never permitted that. The Supreme Court does not provide for that. That is not the law of the land. It should not be the law of the land. So what the gentleman from Maryland is talking about has nothing to do with the legal realities of what we are dealing with here. What we are talking about are those extreme cases where the government overreaches and denies all economically beneficial use of the land basically where they tell people they are going to turn their private property into a public preserve. That is not right.
Charles T. Canady: “The important thing to understand, some people in the land use context do assert that they should have the right to the…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing land use rights and government overreach in property zoning.
Share
More from Charles T. Canady
Is it not true that the bill the gentleman has sponsored would give the abortionist unfettered discretion to determine when an abortion would be performed during the third trimester or post viability? Because the gentleman has an exception…
The gentlewoman is certainly aware that the Supreme Court has required judicial bypass. And if a judicial bypass procedure is not available, the State law is invalid and unenforceable.
America's farming community plays a vital role in the prosperity of the nation.
Under the laws of all the States, those individuals that the gentlewoman has specified would be enabled to go with the young woman to a judge for the judicial bypass. That is available under all the laws as required by the Supreme Court.





