미국의 토지 이용규제와 사법적 구제

The federal Constitution contains no express grant of power of eminent domain, but that power has nonetheless existed in the federal government from its beginning. Thus the provision of the Fifth Amendment that private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation is a tacit recognition of a preexisting power to take private property for public use, rather than a grant of a power. On the other hand, the police power of the states is the source of a body of law which is diversified. Stautes and ordinances sustained by this power need not provide for compensation. because the Fourteenth Amendment has been held not interfere with the exercise by the states of their powers of police. accordingly, it has been suggested that property rights may lawfully be impaired under the police power where their free exercise is detrimental to public interests, and must be taken under the power of eminent domain where they are useful to the public. The Supreme Court has not been determained that what is to the taking(eminent domain) of all restricted public use of the land. As a matter of fact, a major theme of this Article is whether owner of the property could take the compensation through the inverse condemnation or not. In this respects, I think that it is important to make the harmony between the public use and the compensation of the land.