Takings/Just Compensation Clause v. Substantive Due Process Forum

[Cscottrun]

I am getting a little confused here, would appreciate any help offered.

The takings/just compensation clause is obviously separate language from the Fifth Amendment's Due Process clause which includes "life, liberty, or property."

I am confused as to when to apply, when dealing with property infringement, a Takings Clause argument (Penn Central Factors and Pe Se Taking arguments) and when to apply a substantive due process clause argument (liberty interest/fundamental right/narrowly tailored).

I understand how the analysis works under each clause, but I am having trouble differentiating when to apply either one when dealing with an infringement of property.

[Micdiddy]

I am getting a little confused here, would appreciate any help offered.

The takings/just compensation clause is obviously separate language from the Fifth Amendment's Due Process clause which includes "life, liberty, or property."

I am confused as to when to apply, when dealing with property infringement, a Takings Clause argument (Penn Central Factors and Pe Se Taking arguments) and when to apply a substantive due process clause argument (liberty interest/fundamental right/narrowly tailored).

I understand how the analysis works under each clause, but I am having trouble differentiating when to apply either one when dealing with an infringement of property.

Apply them both. First argue both sides on whether the government can take this property or if it violates due process (for example, there is no public policy reason/rational basis to do so). Then, after saying something like "assuming the court finds due process was followed," argue whether the government's action is/is not a Takings.
I am sure there are times when one is more appropriate then the other, hinted to at the facts. For example, if the the government wants to take the property and give it to a private business, likely you are focusing on whether they can or cannot do it. If they want to take blighted property and make it a public park, you are almost certainly arguing the Takings issue. But again, in both of these situations you can (should) mention both, but the facts determine which one is more important.
Hope I understood your question correctly.

[Seminole_305]

Before the government takes (Takings Clause) your property they have to give you notice and opportunity to be heard before a fair tribunal (Due Process).