Slashdot Mirror
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.'"
Roads are public property.
Wires are not.
>The laws against battery apply as much inside my own home as it does in a public place.
Non sequitur. You'll note that any laws against battery within your home are state laws, not Federal (unless your home happens to be on Federal property, e.g. military housing).
It's always a long day... 86400 doesn't fit into a short.
I guess since I don't feel like I have been properly compensated, this gives me the right to dig up and cut all the phone and cable wiring that passes on under or over my property, since the government took that tiny part of land and gave it to those companies respectively.
Oh yea, no it doesn't.
You are fully correct, this is just stupid.