Property Clause Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are sharing sensitive information about bar exam prep. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned."
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are sharing sensitive information about bar exam prep. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned."
-
- Posts: 116
- Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 11:24 pm
Property Clause
Hi all,
Is the property clause the same thing as the takings clause of the 5A?
Is the property clause the same thing as the takings clause of the 5A?
-
- Posts: 81
- Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 7:36 pm
Re: Property Clause
Property Clause is Art IV, and gives the Congress right to dispose of and make all rules and regulations re federal property. Look for federal lands, federal buildings, military airplanes/ships, army bases, etc.ReachTheBar79 wrote:Hi all,
Is the property clause the same thing as the takings clause of the 5A?
- Gamecubesupreme
- Posts: 495
- Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 8:54 pm
Re: Property Clause
If MBE chooses to be evil, they can test about the Property Clause in a standing question
There is an exception for a taxpayer suit challenging a specific congressional appropriation made under the taxing and spending powers for violation of the Establishment Clause. HOWEVER, this exception does not apply to the transfer of property to a religious organization by Congress under the Property Clause. It is a very very narrow exception, one that would make for quite the MBE question.
There is an exception for a taxpayer suit challenging a specific congressional appropriation made under the taxing and spending powers for violation of the Establishment Clause. HOWEVER, this exception does not apply to the transfer of property to a religious organization by Congress under the Property Clause. It is a very very narrow exception, one that would make for quite the MBE question.
-
- Posts: 1273
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 1:14 pm
Re: Property Clause
.
Last edited by BrokenMouse on Thu Apr 28, 2016 8:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 116
- Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 11:24 pm
Re: Property Clause
So the government can just give land away to a religious group? Really? Does it actually do that now....I don't know of any national parks that are owned by religious groups? Or am I missing this....?BrokenMouse wrote:Simple way to remember is government can give land to a religion but not money, because giving land isn't directly advancing religion (lol wut?)Gamecubesupreme wrote:If MBE chooses to be evil, they can test about the Property Clause in a standing question
There is an exception for a taxpayer suit challenging a specific congressional appropriation made under the taxing and spending powers for violation of the Establishment Clause. HOWEVER, this exception does not apply to the transfer of property to a religious organization by Congress under the Property Clause. It is a very very narrow exception, one that would make for quite the MBE question.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 485
- Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2015 5:27 am
Re: Property Clause
ReachTheBar79 wrote: So the government can just give land away to a religious group? Really? Does it actually do that now....I don't know of any national parks that are owned by religious groups? Or am I missing this....?
Perhaps the Malheur occupiers up in Oregon wanted that. Ammon Bundy is actually a Constitutional scholar after all!
-
- Posts: 1273
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 1:14 pm
Re: Property Clause
.
Last edited by BrokenMouse on Thu Apr 28, 2016 8:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 81
- Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 7:36 pm
Re: Property Clause
What happens to Establishment Clause then?BrokenMouse wrote:Simple way to remember is government can give land to a religion but not money, because giving land isn't directly advancing religion (lol wut?)Gamecubesupreme wrote:If MBE chooses to be evil, they can test about the Property Clause in a standing question
There is an exception for a taxpayer suit challenging a specific congressional appropriation made under the taxing and spending powers for violation of the Establishment Clause. HOWEVER, this exception does not apply to the transfer of property to a religious organization by Congress under the Property Clause. It is a very very narrow exception, one that would make for quite the MBE question.
-
- Posts: 485
- Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2015 5:27 am
Re: Property Clause
Sue wrote:
What happens to Establishment Clause then?
Perhaps when the government just gives property (as opposed to money) it is ok because it is not an "entanglement" with Religion. Like when the government gives non-religious textbooks to religious schools. That's ok.
-
- Posts: 116
- Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 11:24 pm
Re: Property Clause
It's confusing because in the MBE world, when the government gives non-religious textbooks to religious schools, it also gives to non-religious schools. So when the government gives land to a religious group, it's not giving the same land to a non-religious group. Basically the government can just give land to whomever it wants?6TimeFailure wrote:Sue wrote:
What happens to Establishment Clause then?
Perhaps when the government just gives property (as opposed to money) it is ok because it is not an "entanglement" with Religion. Like when the government gives non-religious textbooks to religious schools. That's ok.