VI.Conclusion

policepowersarecontrolling.Courtsshouldstaytherulingsontakings claimsrelatedtocommunitymedicalemergencies,oranytakingclaim forthatmatter,untilatleastoneyearhaspassed.Afteroneyear,courts need to view the restrictions with “special skepticism” and determine them as permanent takings under Lucas. The police powers do not allow a ‘temporary’ taking to go on indefinitely without any compensation paid to the property owners, and “a hypothetical point at which the parcels’ future use interests would spring back into existence[]”122 is not sufficient simply because “[a]ll takings are ‘temporary,’ in the sense that the government can always change its mindata latertime[.]”123 Privatepropertyrightshavemorepowerthan being left to the whims of whether or not the government will change itsmindinthefuture.

VI.Conclusion

This paper used examples from the past and present to find a balance between the government’s right to protect the health, safety, and moralsofitscitizens,withprivatepropertyowners’rightstonothave their property taken for public use. Cases from past pandemics highlighted that individuals often acted outside of their authority to protectthecitizens'health,safety,andmorals.Whiletheiractionswere not held to be government action, it still allowed the government to complete its objectives and mitigate medical emergencies. A development of takings jurisprudence was given, showing steps the courts have made in an effort to better balance the rights of property owners with the government over the last 100 years. Lastly, the cases stemmingfromtheCOVID-19outbreakhaveshownwherethecourts currentlyarewhilehighlightingquestionsthatremainunanswered,yet desperately needed, to truly balance the police powers with private propertyrights.

122 Res. Invs., Inc., 85 F. Cl.at481(emphasis omitted). 123 Hendlerv.UnitedStates,952 F.2d 1364,1376 (Fed.Cir.1991).