There have been some great & promising starts in some kinds of litigation, using state statutes, or even city ordinances, to make cities simply follow the law to allow more housing. But the language of civil rights is constitutional litigation. And there we haven’t seen much. 4/
The short answer to your question below is that @SonjaTrauss and I co-founded @YIMBY_Law, which sues cities all the time. I don't think constitutional property-rights suits are the most effective approach to achieving our goals.https://twitter.com/IJSanders/status/1181278308803047425?s=20 …
-
-
As for other urbanists, few YIMBYs get paid to YIMBY and they don't have the time or resources to consider launching a multi-year impact litigation plan. I also don't think such an approach would be the highest and best use of my time or my donors' money.
-
That's where I'm saying to my property rights colleagues (who make a living suing the government) that there's more work for them to do, and that having coffee with people like you would give them some better ideas.
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Yes, you guys do great work! & as I say in my post, using statutory challenges is important. My point is that, long-term, civil rights movements achieve the most change thru constitutional litigation. I could be wrong, but it's my read of the history.
- Još 3 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.