Close Menu
  • Home
  • Alternative News
    • Politics & Policy
    • Independent Journalism
    • Geopolitics & War
    • Economy & Power
    • Investigative Reports
  • Double Speak
    • Media Bias
    • Fact Check & Misinformation
    • Political Spin
    • Propaganda & Narrative
  • Truth or Scare
    • UFO & Extraterrestrial
    • Myth Busting & Debunking
    • Paranormal & Mysteries
    • Conspiracy Theories
  • Contact Us
  • About Us

Subscribe to Updates

Get the latest creative news from FooBar about art, design and business.

What's Hot

Lindsay Clancy Case Isn't Complicated

September 4, 2026

Flock Is Losing Dozens of Contracts as Controversy Grows

September 4, 2026

Trump 'Suffering From Success' on Border?

September 4, 2026
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
The Other News
Subscribe
  • Home
  • Alternative News
    • Politics & Policy
    • Independent Journalism
    • Geopolitics & War
    • Economy & Power
    • Investigative Reports
  • Double Speak
    • Media Bias
    • Fact Check & Misinformation
    • Political Spin
    • Propaganda & Narrative
  • Truth or Scare
    • UFO & Extraterrestrial
    • Myth Busting & Debunking
    • Paranormal & Mysteries
    • Conspiracy Theories
  • Contact Us
  • About Us
The Other News
Home»Politics & Policy»Federalist Society Courthouse Steps Podcast on Pung v. Isabella County Takings Case
Politics & Policy

Federalist Society Courthouse Steps Podcast on Pung v. Isabella County Takings Case

nickBy nickJune 27, 2026No Comments1 Min Read
Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email

[ad_1]

I recently participated in a Federalist Society podcast on Pung v. Isabella County, the Supreme Court’s recent badly flawed Takings Clause decision. Deborah La Fetra of the Pacific Legal Foundation (one of the lawyers representing the property owners in the case) also took part. Deborah is a bit more optimistic than me about the ultimate resolution of the case on remand (though I agree with her that the property owners might well ultimately prevail based on the unfairness of the procedures they were subjected to). Regardless, I think we both agree that the Court’s decision sets a terrible precedent on the calculation of “just compensation” under the Takings Clause, in cases where the government seizes property due to possible tax delinquencies. I previously wrote about Pung here and here.

I embedded the video of the podcast below:

NOTE: TheĀ  Pacific Legal Foundation is also my wife’s employer. She, however, is not one of the attorneys on the case. The Pung estate is also represented by other attorneys.

[ad_2]

Source link

Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
nick
  • Website

Related Posts

Unionized delivery drivers vs. deliveries

August 19, 2026

Washington's $40 Trillion Debt Milestone

August 19, 2026

The Cascade of Dysfunction That Helped Doom Jason Arday

August 19, 2026
Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

Demo
Our Picks

Putin Says Western Sanctions are Akin to Declaration of War

January 9, 2020

Investors Jump into Commodities While Keeping Eye on Recession Risk

January 8, 2020

Marquez Explains Lack of Confidence During Qatar GP Race

January 7, 2020

There’s No Bigger Prospect in World Football Than Pedri

January 6, 2020
Stay In Touch
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Pinterest
  • Instagram
  • YouTube
  • Vimeo
Don't Miss

Lindsay Clancy Case Isn't Complicated

Media Bias September 4, 2026

[ad_1] Unfortunately for Americans, that individual is a child killer. [ad_2] Source link

Flock Is Losing Dozens of Contracts as Controversy Grows

September 4, 2026

Trump 'Suffering From Success' on Border?

September 4, 2026

Are Fewer Children the Future?

September 4, 2026

Subscribe to Updates

Get the latest creative news from SmartMag about art & design.

Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram Pinterest
© 2026 ThemeSphere. Designed by ThemeSphere.

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.