Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
Share Home Equity Theft: When Does The "Takings Clause" Become The "Bend Over & Take It Clause"
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Or
Home Equity Theft: When Does The "Takings Clause" Become The "Bend Over & Take It Clause"
Today on Legalese we will be taking a look at the legalized armed robbery that constitutes "Home Equity Theft”.
Last week, the Supreme Court agreed to grant cert on the merits for the case "Tyler v. City of Minneapolis". This case challenges the constitutionality of a Minnesota state law empowering local governments to seize the entire value of a property in order to pay off a much smaller delinquent property tax debt. The property owner in the case—93-year-old widow Geraldine Tyler—argues that this kind of uncompensated seizure of home equity violates the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment, which requires government to pay "just compensation" anytime it takes private property, and the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment.
So how does home equity theft actually work? How does the government justify this policy which stands in clear contravention to the 5th and 8th amendment's takings clause & excessive fines clause (respectively).
We will discuss the likely outcome of the case as well as the broader implications that this potential landmark 5th amendment case will have.
FOLLOW
SUPPORT
Tags: Law, Constitution, Politics, legal theory, Moral Philosophy, Current Events, supreme court, equity asset theft, 5th amendment, 8th amendment, takings clause, excessive fines clause, Geraldine Tyler, Tawanda hall, 6th circuit, 8th circuit, property rights, taxes, Minneapolis, Hennepin County
View all episodes
By Bob Fiedler
5
11 ratings
Today on Legalese we will be taking a look at the legalized armed robbery that constitutes "Home Equity Theft”.
Last week, the Supreme Court agreed to grant cert on the merits for the case "Tyler v. City of Minneapolis". This case challenges the constitutionality of a Minnesota state law empowering local governments to seize the entire value of a property in order to pay off a much smaller delinquent property tax debt. The property owner in the case—93-year-old widow Geraldine Tyler—argues that this kind of uncompensated seizure of home equity violates the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment, which requires government to pay "just compensation" anytime it takes private property, and the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment.
So how does home equity theft actually work? How does the government justify this policy which stands in clear contravention to the 5th and 8th amendment's takings clause & excessive fines clause (respectively).
We will discuss the likely outcome of the case as well as the broader implications that this potential landmark 5th amendment case will have.
FOLLOW
SUPPORT
Tags: Law, Constitution, Politics, legal theory, Moral Philosophy, Current Events, supreme court, equity asset theft, 5th amendment, 8th amendment, takings clause, excessive fines clause, Geraldine Tyler, Tawanda hall, 6th circuit, 8th circuit, property rights, taxes, Minneapolis, Hennepin County