{"id":{"repo_id":"unlv","oai_identifier":"oai:oasis.library.unlv.edu:rtds-1278"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/unlv/oai:oasis.library.unlv.edu:rtds-1278","repository":{"repo_id":"unlv","name":"University of Nevada - Las Vegas","base_url":"https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/do/oai/"},"display":{"title":"Of mice and missiles: An Austrian School economic appraisal of Lucas v South Carolina Coastal Commission","abstract":"This paper argues that to maximize the utility of society, a legal system must precisely define and strictly enforce property rights; Chapter I provides a theoretical economic framework by which various policy and judicial decisions affecting property rights can be considered; Chapter II examines the proper role for a legal system as well as the historical and United States Constitutional respect for property rights. Secondly, the devolution of this earlier respect for property rights is discussed by examining case decisions which tolerate to a greater degree, force with respect to physical property. Finally, the notion of the regulatory taking is considered; Chapter III looks more specifically at a recent regulatory \"takings\" case heard by the U.S. Supreme Court; Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Commission. It is discussed using the economic tools of analysis presented in Chapter I with references to the legal case history addressed in Chapter II.","abstract_html":"This paper argues that to maximize the utility of society, a legal system must precisely define and strictly enforce property rights; Chapter I provides a theoretical economic framework by which various policy and judicial decisions affecting property rights can be considered; Chapter II examines the proper role for a legal system as well as the historical and United States Constitutional respect for property rights. Secondly, the devolution of this earlier respect for property rights is discussed by examining case decisions which tolerate to a greater degree, force with respect to physical property. Finally, the notion of the regulatory taking is considered; Chapter III looks more specifically at a recent regulatory "takings" case heard by the U.S. Supreme Court; Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Commission. It is discussed using the economic tools of analysis presented in Chapter I with references to the legal case history addressed in Chapter II.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Becker, Joseph Francis"],"institution":"University of Nevada, Las Vegas","degree_name":"Master of Arts (MA)","degree_level":"Thesis","degree_discipline":"Economics","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Murray N. Rothbard"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":1993,"date_issued":"1993-01-01T08:00:00Z","date_published":"1993-01-01T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:24:22Z","subjects":[],"languages":["English"],"rights":["IN COPYRIGHT. For more information about this rights statement, please visit http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/rtds/279"],"render_values":[{"text":"https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/rtds/279","href":"https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/rtds/279","code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://doi.org/10.25669/e2ks-mulx","outbound_label":"DOI","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Murray N. Rothbard"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Becker, Joseph Francis"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["University of Nevada, Las Vegas"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Text"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Economics"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Arts (MA)"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["English"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["IN COPYRIGHT. For more information about this rights statement, please visit http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["10.25669/e2ks-mulx","https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/rtds/279","https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/context/rtds/article/1278/viewcontent/uc.pdf"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["This paper argues that to maximize the utility of society, a legal system must precisely define and strictly enforce property rights; Chapter I provides a theoretical economic framework by which various policy and judicial decisions affecting property rights can be considered; Chapter II examines the proper role for a legal system as well as the historical and United States Constitutional respect for property rights. Secondly, the devolution of this earlier respect for property rights is discussed by examining case decisions which tolerate to a greater degree, force with respect to physical property. Finally, the notion of the regulatory taking is considered; Chapter III looks more specifically at a recent regulatory \"takings\" case heard by the U.S. Supreme Court; Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Commission. It is discussed using the economic tools of analysis presented in Chapter I with references to the legal case history addressed in Chapter II."]},{"key":"dc:format","label":"Dc Format","values":["pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Of mice and missiles: An Austrian School economic appraisal of Lucas v South Carolina Coastal Commission"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Murray N. Rothbard"],"dc:creator":["Becker, Joseph Francis"],"dc:description.abstract":["This paper argues that to maximize the utility of society, a legal system must precisely define and strictly enforce property rights; Chapter I provides a theoretical economic framework by which various policy and judicial decisions affecting property rights can be considered; Chapter II examines the proper role for a legal system as well as the historical and United States Constitutional respect for property rights. Secondly, the devolution of this earlier respect for property rights is discussed by examining case decisions which tolerate to a greater degree, force with respect to physical property. Finally, the notion of the regulatory taking is considered; Chapter III looks more specifically at a recent regulatory \"takings\" case heard by the U.S. Supreme Court; Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Commission. It is discussed using the economic tools of analysis presented in Chapter I with references to the legal case history addressed in Chapter II."],"dc:format":["pdf"],"dc:identifier":["10.25669/e2ks-mulx","https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/rtds/279","https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/context/rtds/article/1278/viewcontent/uc.pdf"],"dc:language":["English"],"dc:publisher":["University of Nevada, Las Vegas"],"dc:rights":["IN COPYRIGHT. For more information about this rights statement, please visit http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dc:title":["Of mice and missiles: An Austrian School economic appraisal of Lucas v South Carolina Coastal Commission"],"dc:type":["Text"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Economics"],"thesis:degree_level":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Arts (MA)"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:24:22Z"}