Does Net Neutrality Violate the Fifth Amendment?

SonicSpike writes "A forthcoming paper from Boston College Law Professor Daniel Lyons offers an even stronger basis for challenge: The Fifth Amendment. Under Prof. Lyons's theory, net neutrality would run afoul of eminent domain. It would constitute a regulatory taking, requiring just compensation. Under US Supreme Court precedent, any governmental regulation that results in 'permanent, physical occupation' of private property constitutes a per se taking. This is true even where the government itself is not doing the occupying. If the government grants access to other parties to freely traipse across private property, it's still a taking. In effect, the government has forced one party to give a permanent easement to another party, destroying the first's 'right to exclude.'"

Comments

Re:riiiiight

[dup_account]

Ah, but the crazy fringe lunatics (ie Tea Baggers and ... Republicans) want to start repealing those rights. Either by claiming that these rights are "implied" and therefore illegal. Or they want to repeal the actual constitutional/amendment rights that we have.

It's not about rights really, it's about corporate interests. And yes, a corporation is basically a sociopathic person these days (person because of supreme court, sociopath because they are basically required to have not "have no regard for the moral or legal standards" other than stockholder rights.

Re:Bullshit

[DaveV1.0]

Yes, please explain how you have a right to use someone else's network and equipment regardless of the desires of the owners of said network and equipment. Do you also believe that one should have the right to force a newspaper to print one's writings as well?