Takings by {author}: summary and why it matters

What it argues

Epstein reads the Fifth Amendment's ban on taking property for public use without just compensation broadly. A taking, in his view, occurs not only when the government seizes land but whenever it removes or restricts a right of use, including through zoning, rent control, environmental rules and many forms of taxation, unless the owner receives compensation.

From that premise he argues that large portions of the modern regulatory and welfare state, which redistribute from one group to another, would be invalid or have to be paid for. He builds the case on Locke, common law and the logic of property, and does not accept the New Deal settlement that has allowed wide regulation.

The book is a work of legal theory, and a consequence of the position is that it would curtail much of what governments do, which Epstein accepts.

Why it matters

The book gave the property rights movement an intellectual foundation, and it affected later litigation and legislation on regulatory takings. Courts have not adopted its full position, but the debate over what counts as a taking, as in Kelo v. New London, continues.

About the author

Richard A. Epstein (born 1943) is an American legal scholar who taught for many years at the University of Chicago Law School and then at New York University. He has written on torts, contracts and property, and on the regulation of health care. Takings was among the first books to argue that the Fifth Amendment's compensation guarantee ought to extend to much regulation.

Who should read it

Lawyers, property owners and readers of constitutional theory.