Shea has a great farm bordering on a river and plans to build a house on a cliff overlooking the water.Shea was also considering building a couple of guest cottages to rent to vacationers.One day a land conservatory came to Shea and asked to have the land designated as a pristine area whereby no development or building could take place.Shea told them to get lost.Subsequently,the jurisdiction in which Shea lived had passed a regulation permanently prohibiting riverfront owners in the area from building any structures within one half mile of the river.There had been no such restriction in the state or county previously,and Shea suspects that the regulation is part of a plot to force landowners to agree to the request of the land conservatory.Shea tells the builder to go ahead with plans to construct the home because the government cannot take land through excessive regulation.Is Shea correct that the government cannot take land through excessive regulation?
A) Shea is incorrect,although if the government action constitutes a taking,compensation to the landowner must be provided.
B) Shea is incorrect,and no compensation to the landowner is required.
C) Shea is incorrect,although she would only be entitled to compensation for any lost profits that can be established.
D) Shea is correct,and the regulation would be overturned by a federal court.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The government can regulate land use, even to the point of prohibiting certain activities or structures, but if the regulation goes too far and effectively takes the land from the owner, compensation must be provided. This is known as the "takings clause" of the Fifth Amendment. In Shea's case, if the regulation effectively prohibits all use of her land, she may be entitled to compensation.

Shea Has a Great Farm Bordering on a River and Plans