Wisconsin
How Eastern Enterprises v. Apfel applies in Wisconsin: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Constitutional Law—Takings and Substantive Due Process.
Wisconsin generally follows the federal framework for evaluating takings under the Fifth Amendment, which has been interpreted in both federal and state contexts. However, Wisconsin courts have a distinct body of case law that articulates additional protections under its state constitution.
In Wisconsin, as in federal law, the government’s action that results in a taking of private property for public use constitutes a compensable taking unless it falls under a recognized exception such as mere regulation that does not deprive the owner of all economically viable use.
The court held that the government's application of land use regulations constituted a taking, requiring compensation because it denied the property owner the economically beneficial use of their property.
The ruling established that a property owner must be compensated when the government has effectively taken their property through regulatory constraints.
This case reaffirmed that the Wisconsin Constitution provides greater protection against takings than the federal constitution, highlighting the state’s commitment to property rights.
Both federal and Wisconsin law assess takings using a similar test, including the investment-backed expectations and character of the government action. However, Wisconsin courts have tended to offer broader protections under state constitutional provisions than under the federal standard, particularly in the context of substantive due process related to property rights.
Understanding the nuances of Wisconsin's approach to takings and substantive due process, especially regarding state constitutional protections, is crucial for the Wisconsin bar exam.