eastern
enterprises
apfel
commissioner
social
security
argued
march
decided
june
ultimately
congress
passed
coal
industry
retiree
health
benefit
act
coal
act
stabilize
funding
provide
benefits
retirees
merging
benefit
plans
new
fund
combined
fund
provides
substantially
benefits
provided
plans
funded
premiums
assessed
coal
operators
signed
nbcwa
agreement
requiring
contributions
benefit
plans
respondent
commissioner
social
security
assigns
retirees
signatory
coal
operators
according
following
allocation
formula
first
recent
signatory
subsequent
nbcwa
employ
retiree
coal
industry
least
years
second
recent
signatory
subsequent
nbcwa
employ
retiree
coal
industry
third
signatory
operator
employed
retiree
coal
industry
longest
period
time
prior
effective
date
nbcwa
petitioner
eastern
enterprises
eastern
signatory
every
nbcwa
executed
business
within
coal
act
meaning
although
left
coal
industry
transferring
coal
operations
subsidiary
eacc
ultimately
selling
interest
eacc
respondent
peabody
holding
company
peabody
coal
act
commissioner
assigned
eastern
obligation
combined
fund
premiums
respecting
retired
miners
worked
company
eastern
sued
commissioner
respondents
claiming
coal
act
violates
substantive
due
process
constitutes
taking
violation
fifth
amendment
district
granted
respondents
summary
judgment
first
circuit
affirmed
held
judgment
reversed
case
remanded
reversed
remanded
justice
joined
chief
justice
justice
scalia
justice
thomas
concluded
declaratory
judgment
injunction
petitioner
seeks
appropriate
remedy
taking
alleged
case
cite
syllabus
within
district
courts
power
award
equitable
relief
tucker
act
may
require
compensation
claim
takings
clause
filed
federal
claims
petitioner
seek
compensation
government
situations
analogous
one
assumed
lack
compensatory
remedy
granted
equitable
relief
takings
clause
violations
without
discussing
tucker
act
applicability
see
babbitt
youpee
pp
coal
act
allocation
liability
eastern
violates
takings
clause
pp
economic
regulation
coal
act
may
effect
taking
security
industrial
bank
party
challenging
government
action
bears
substantial
burden
every
destruction
injury
property
action
constitutional
taking
regulation
constitutionality
evaluated
examining
governmental
action
justice
fairness
see
andrus
allard
although
inquiry
lend
set
formula
three
factors
traditionally
informed
regulatory
takings
analysis
economic
impact
regulation
interference
reasonable
investment
backed
expectations
character
governmental
action
kaiser
aetna
pp
analysis
case
informed
previous
decisions
considering
constitutionality
somewhat
similar
legislative
schemes
usery
turner
elkhorn
mining
black
lung
benefits
act
connolly
pension
benefit
guaranty
corporation
multiemployer
pension
plan
amendments
act
concrete
pipe
products
construction
laborers
pension
trust
southern
opinions
make
clear
congress
considerable
leeway
fashion
economic
legislation
including
power
affect
contractual
commitments
private
parties
may
impose
retroactive
liability
degree
particularly
confined
short
limited
periods
required
practicalities
producing
national
legislation
pension
benefit
guaranty
corporation
gray
decisions
however
left
open
possibility
legislation
might
unconstitutional
imposes
severe
retroactive
liability
limited
class
parties
anticipated
liability
extent
liability
substantially
disproportionate
parties
experience
pp
coal
act
allocation
scheme
applied
eastern
presents
case
three
traditional
factors
considered
economic
impact
eastern
coal
act
liability
substantial
enterprises
apfel
syllabus
company
clearly
deprived
million
must
pay
combined
fund
employer
statutory
liability
multiemployer
plan
benefits
reflect
proportionality
experience
plan
concrete
pipe
supra
eastern
contributed
funds
ceased
coal
mining
operations
neither
participated
negotiations
agreed
make
contributions
connection
benefit
plans
established
subsequent
nbcwa
latter
agreements
however
first
suggest
industry
commitment
funding
lifetime
health
benefits
retirees
dependents
years
eastern
employed
miners
benefits
far
less
extensive
nbcwa
unvested
fully
subject
alteration
termination
extent
eastern
may
able
seek
indemnification
eacc
peabody
contractual
arrangements
might
insure
eastern
liabilities
arising
former
coal
operations
indemnity
neither
enhanced
supplanted
coal
act
affect
availability
declaratory
relief
sought
respondents
argument
coal
act
moderates
mitigates
economic
impact
allocating
eastern
former
employees
signatories
nbcwa
unavailing
eastern
forced
bear
burden
lifetime
benefits
former
employees
mean
liability
significant
economic
burden
similar
reasons
coal
act
substantially
interferes
eastern
reasonable
expectations
operates
retroactively
reaching
back
years
impose
liability
based
eastern
activities
retroactive
legislation
generally
disfavored
presents
problems
unfairness
deprive
citizens
legitimate
expectations
upset
settled
transactions
general
motors
romein
distance
past
coal
act
reaches
back
impose
liability
eastern
magnitude
liability
raise
substantial
fairness
questions
nbcwa
demonstrate
implicit
industrywide
agreement
fund
lifetime
health
benefits
time
eastern
involved
coal
industry
funds
eastern
participated
operated
basis
classes
beneficiaries
subject
trustees
discretion
erisa
forced
revisions
fund
eastern
longer
industry
lifetime
medical
benefits
viewed
promised
thus
coal
act
scheme
allocating
combined
fund
premiums
calibrated
either
eastern
past
actions
agreement
company
cite
syllabus
federal
government
pattern
involvement
coal
industry
given
eastern
sufficient
notice
lifetime
health
benefits
might
guaranteed
retirees
several
decades
later
eastern
liability
benefits
also
differs
coal
operators
responsibility
black
lung
benefits
act
spread
cost
disabilities
profited
fruits
employees
labor
turner
elkhorn
supra
finally
nature
governmental
action
case
quite
unusual
congress
solution
grave
funding
problem
identified
singles
certain
employers
bear
substantial
burden
based
employers
conduct
far
past
unrelated
commitment
employers
made
injury
caused
pp
justice
kennedy
concluded
application
coal
act
eastern
violate
proper
bounds
settled
due
process
principles
although
hesitant
subject
economic
legislation
due
process
scrutiny
general
matter
country
law
harbored
singular
distrust
retroactive
statutes
distrust
reflected
due
process
jurisprudence
example
usery
turner
elkhorn
mining
held
due
process
requires
inquiry
whether
legislature
acted
arbitrary
irrational
way
enacting
retroactive
law
formulation
repeated
numerous
recent
cases
carlton
reflect
recognition
retroactive
lawmaking
particular
concern
legislative
temptation
use
means
retribution
unpopular
groups
individuals
landgraf
usi
film
products
change
legal
consequences
transactions
long
closed
destroy
reasonable
certainty
security
objects
property
ownership
due
process
protection
property
must
understood
incorporate
settled
tradition
retroactive
laws
great
severity
instant
case
presents
one
rare
instances
legislature
exceeded
limits
imposed
due
process
coal
act
remedy
bears
legitimate
relation
interest
government
asserts
supports
statute
degree
retroactive
effect
significant
determinant
statute
constitutionality
carlton
supra
unprecedented
scope
since
coal
act
created
liability
events
occurring
years
ago
upheld
imposition
liability
former
employers
based
past
employment
relationships
remedial
statutes
designed
impose
actual
measurable
business
cost
employer
able
avoid
past
turner
elkhorn
supra
coal
act
serve
enterprises
apfel
syllabus
purpose
beneficiaries
expectation
lifetime
benefits
created
promises
agreements
made
long
eastern
left
coal
business
eastern
responsible
perilous
condition
plans
jeopardized
benefits
pp
connor
announced
judgment
delivered
opinion
rehnquist
scalia
thomas
joined
thomas
filed
concurring
opinion
kennedy
filed
opinion
concurring
judgment
dissenting
part
stevens
filed
dissenting
opinion
souter
ginsburg
breyer
joined
breyer
filed
dissenting
opinion
stevens
souter
ginsburg
joined
eastern
enterprises
petitioner
kenneth
apfel
commissioner
social
security
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
first
circuit
june
justice
thomas
concurring
justice
opinion
correctly
concludes
coal
act
imposition
retroactive
liability
petitioner
violates
takings
clause
write
separately
emphasize
ex
post
facto
clause
constitution
art
cl
even
clearly
reflects
principle
etrospective
laws
indeed
generally
unjust
story
commentaries
constitution
ed
since
calder
bull
dall
however
considered
ex
post
facto
clause
apply
criminal
context
never
convinced
soundness
limitation
calder
principally
justified
contrary
interpretation
render
takings
clause
unnecessary
see
opinion
chase
appropriate
case
therefore
willing
reconsider
calder
progeny
determine
whether
retroactive
civil
law
passes
muster
current
takings
clause
jurisprudence
nonetheless
unconstitutional
ex
post
facto
clause
today
case
however
present
unconstitutional
taking
join
justice
opinion
full
eastern
enterprises
petitioner
kenneth
apfel
commissioner
social
security
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
first
circuit
june
justice
stevens
justice
souter
justice
ginsburg
justice
breyer
join
dissenting
appellate
judges
better
historians
others
respect
central
issue
resolved
coal
act
persuaded
consensus
among
circuit
judges
appraised
issue
accurate
views
majority
uneasy
truce
coal
operators
miners
enabled
coal
production
continue
depended
value
handshake
fine
print
written
documents
period
implicit
understanding
sides
bargaining
table
operators
provide
miners
lifetime
health
benefits
understanding
kept
mines
operation
enabled
eastern
earn
handsome
profits
transferred
coal
business
subsidiary
understanding
critical
fact
shared
judges
seventh
circuit
sixth
circuit
first
circuit
understanding
motivated
members
coal
commission
conclude
operators
employed
orphaned
miners
share
responsibility
health
benefits
understanding
led
legislators
political
parties
conclude
coal
act
represented
fair
solution
difficult
problem
given
critical
importance
reasonable
expectations
miners
operators
period
implicit
agreement
made
explicit
unable
agree
plurality
conclusion
retroactive
application
act
unconstitutional
taking
eastern
property
rather
seems
plurality
justice
kennedy
substituted
judgment
fair
better
informed
judgment
members
coal
commission
congress
accordingly
conclude
whether
provision
question
analyzed
takings
clause
due
process
clause
eastern
carried
burden
overcoming
presumption
constitutionality
accorded
act
congress
demonstrating
provision
unsupported
reasonable
expectations
parties
interest
eastern
enterprises
petitioner
kenneth
apfel
commissioner
social
security
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
first
circuit
june
justice
breyer
justice
stevens
justice
souter
justice
ginsburg
join
dissenting
must
decide
whether
fundamentally
unfair
congress
require
eastern
enterprises
pay
health
care
costs
retired
miners
worked
eastern
eastern
stopped
mining
coal
many
years
eastern
benefited
labor
miners
eastern
helped
create
conditions
led
miners
expect
continued
health
care
benefits
families
retired
eastern
continued
draw
sizable
profits
coal
industry
though
wholly
owned
subsidiary
reasons
believe
congress
act
unreasonably
otherwise
unjustly
imposing
health
care
costs
upon
eastern
consequently
view
statute
us
constitutional
preliminary
matter
agree
justice
kennedy
ante
plurality
views
case
wrong
legal
lens
constitution
takings
clause
apply
clause
refers
taking
private
property
public
use
without
compensa
tion
amdt
language
suggests
heart
clause
lies
concern
preventing
arbitrary
unfair
government
action
providing
compensation
legitimate
government
action
takes
private
property
serve
public
good
private
property
upon
clause
traditionally
focused
specific
interest
physical
intellectual
property
see
penn
central
transp
new
york
city
ruckelshaus
monsanto
requires
compensation
government
takes
property
public
purpose
see
dolan
city
tigard
clause
requires
payment
government
people
alone
bear
public
burdens
fairness
justice
borne
public
whole
quoting
armstrong
case
involves
interest
physical
intellectual
property
ordinary
liability
pay
money
government
third
parties
directly
held
takings
clause
applies
creation
kind
liability
made
clear
seizures
eminent
domain
also
certain
takings
regulation
require
compensation
clause
see
pennsylvania
coal
mahon
hile
property
may
regulated
certain
extent
regulation
goes
far
recognized
taking
lucas
south
carolina
coastal
council
land
use
regulation
deprives
owner
economically
beneficial
use
property
constitutes
taking
nollan
california
coastal
public
easement
across
property
may
constitute
taking
precedents
concern
taking
interests
physical
property
also
made
clear
clause
apply
monetary
interest
generated
fund
private
individual
paid
money
webb
fabulous
pharmacies
beckwith
monetary
interest
issue
arose
operation
specific
separately
identifiable
fund
money
government
took
interest
specific
fund
money
general
liability
liability
runs
government
third
parties
armstrong
supra
government
destroyed
liens
advantage
connolly
pension
benefit
guaranty
corporation
taking
government
physically
invade
permanently
appropriate
assets
use
emphasis
added
two
cases
arguably
acted
takings
clause
might
apply
creation
general
liability
connolly
supra
concrete
pipe
products
construction
laborers
pension
trust
southern
first
cases
said
takings
clause
violated
part
government
physically
invade
permanently
appropriate
assets
use
connolly
also
rejected
position
taking
occurs
whenever
legislation
requires
one
person
use
assets
benefit
another
id
second
case
basically
followed
analysis
first
case
concrete
pipe
cases
rejected
claim
takings
clause
violation
id
connolly
supra
dearth
takings
clause
authority
surprising
application
takings
clause
bristles
conceptual
difficulties
clause
applies
government
simply
orders
pay
apply
government
simply
orders
pay
government
assesses
tax
cf
leckie
smokeless
coal
charac
terizing
reachback
liability
payments
tax
cert
denied
chateaugay
cert
denied
sub
nom
ltv
steel
shalala
clause
apply
statutes
rules
routinely
creat
burdens
directly
benefit
others
connolly
supra
regardless
apply
kind
takings
clause
analysis
violation
means
law
invalidation
rather
simply
payment
compensation
see
first
english
evangelical
lutheran
church
glendale
county
los
angeles
takings
clause
designed
limit
governmental
interference
property
rights
per
se
rather
secure
compensation
event
otherwise
proper
interference
amounting
taking
need
face
difficulties
however
need
torture
takings
clause
fit
case
question
potential
unfairness
retroactive
natural
home
due
process
clause
fifth
amendment
neighbor
clause
says
person
shall
deprive
life
liberty
property
without
due
process
law
amdt
safeguards
citizens
arbitrary
irrational
legislation
due
process
clause
offer
protection
legislation
unfairly
retroactive
least
readily
takings
clause
might
courts
sometimes
suggested
law
fundamentally
unfair
retroactivity
law
basically
arbitrary
see
pension
benefit
guaranty
corporation
gray
id
etroactive
aspects
legislation
imposing
withdrawal
liability
employers
participating
pension
plan
must
meet
test
due
process
id
etrospective
civil
legislation
may
offend
due
process
particularly
harsh
oppressive
internal
quotation
marks
omit
ted
usery
turner
elkhorn
mining
cf
carlton
retroactive
tax
provision
welch
henry
national
labor
relations
board
guy
atkinson
invalidating
administrative
order
arbitrary
capricious
abuse
discretion
see
inequity
retroactive
policy
making
sort
thing
system
law
abhors
application
due
process
clause
automatically
trigger
takings
clause
word
property
appears
word
appears
midst
different
phrases
somewhat
different
objectives
thereby
permitting
differences
way
term
interpreted
compare
martin
linen
supply
person
includes
corporations
purposes
fifth
amendment
double
jeopardy
clause
doe
person
include
corporation
purposes
fifth
amendment
selfincrimination
clause
insofar
plurality
avoids
reliance
upon
due
process
clause
fear
resurrecting
lochner
new
york
related
doctrines
substantive
due
process
fear
misplaced
cf
id
holmes
dissenting
lincoln
fed
union
northwestern
iron
metal
repudiating
allgeyer
lochner
adair
coppage
constitutional
doctrine
plurality
points
ante
unfair
retroactive
assessment
liability
upsets
settled
expectations
thereby
undermines
basic
objective
law
see
story
commentaries
constitution
ed
criticizing
retrospective
laws
failing
accord
fundamental
principles
social
compact
ibid
retroactive
legislation
invalid
upon
principles
derived
general
nature
free
governments
necessary
limitations
created
thereby
general
motors
romein
etroactive
legislation
deprive
citizens
legitimate
expectations
fletcher
peck
cranch
johnson
concurring
suggesting
retroactive
legislation
invalid
offends
principles
natural
law
find
due
process
clause
protects
kind
fundamental
protects
unfair
allocation
public
burdens
kind
specially
arbitrary
retroactive
read
clause
light
basic
purpose
fair
application
law
purpose
hearkens
back
magna
carta
resurrect
substantive
notions
freedom
contract
see
ferguson
skrupa
thus
like
plurality
inquire
law
us
fundamentally
unfair
unjust
ante
ask
question
like
justice
kennedy
believe
coal
act
deprive
eastern
property
without
due
process
law
amdt
ii
substantive
question
us
whether
fundamentally
unfair
require
eastern
make
future
payments
health
care
costs
retired
miners
families
basis
eastern
past
association
miners
congress
might
assessed
use
coal
taxpayer
order
pay
retired
coal
miners
health
benefits
congress
instead
imposed
liability
eastern
coal
industry
retiree
health
benefit
act
coal
act
ed
supp
ii
fairness
question
eastern
answer
lie
contractual
promise
pay
eastern
made
contractual
promise
eastern
participate
benefit
plan
made
contractual
promise
prior
departure
coal
industry
justice
stevens
points
case
civil
law
suit
breach
contract
constitutional
challenge
congress
decision
assess
new
future
liability
basis
old
employment
relationship
ante
stevens
dissenting
unless
fundamentally
unfair
unjust
terms
eastern
reasonable
reliance
settled
expectations
impose
liability
coal
act
reachback
provision
meets
challenge
see
connolly
concrete
pipe
believe
several
features
case
demonstrate
relationship
eastern
payments
demanded
act
special
enough
pass
constitution
fundamental
fairness
test
even
though
eastern
left
coal
industry
historical
circumstances
taken
together
prevent
eastern
showing
act
reachback
liability
provision
frustrates
eastern
reasonable
settled
expectations
impose
unconstitutional
liability
cf
penn
central
one
thing
liability
statute
imposes
upon
eastern
extends
miners
eastern
employed
see
imposing
liability
presently
operating
coal
firm
ratified
subsequent
bargaining
agreement
ever
employed
retiree
eastern
employed
retiree
longer
reachback
firm
miners
whose
labor
benefited
eastern
younger
healthier
insofar
working
conditions
created
risk
future
health
problems
miners
eastern
created
conditions
factors
help
distinguish
eastern
others
respect
later
obligation
pay
health
care
costs
inevitably
arise
old
age
see
cong
rec
conference
report
coal
act
coal
act
assigns
liability
companies
employed
retirees
thereby
benefitted
services
hearings
provisions
relating
health
benefits
retired
coal
miners
house
committee
ways
means
hereinafter
hearings
health
benefits
house
committee
ways
means
financing
umwa
coal
miner
orphan
retiree
health
benefits
comm
print
hereinafter
house
report
congress
sometimes
imposed
liability
even
retroactive
liability
designed
prevent
degradation
natural
resource
upon
used
benefited
see
comprehensive
environmental
response
compensation
liability
act
cercla
et
seq
ed
supp
analogy
imperfect
calls
attention
special
tie
firm
former
employee
human
resource
helps
explain
special
retroactive
liability
connection
justifying
retroactive
liability
helps
distinguish
firm
like
eastern
employed
miner
longer
makes
coal
funding
sources
say
current
coal
producers
coal
consumers
make
use
coal
never
employed
miner
benefited
work
importantly
record
demonstrates
eastern
contributed
making
important
promise
miners
promise
even
contractually
enforceable
led
miners
develo
reasonable
expectation
continue
receive
retiree
medical
benefits
ante
relevant
history
outlined
shows
industry
action
including
action
eastern
combined
federal
government
action
miners
forbearance
produced
circumstances
made
natural
miners
believe
either
industry
government
make
every
effort
see
received
health
benefits
terms
explicitly
included
previously
signed
bargaining
agreements
health
care
miners
insofar
existed
provided
company
doctors
company
towns
see
dept
interior
report
coal
mines
administration
medical
survey
industry
boone
report
id
describing
care
substandard
criticizing
noticeable
deficiency
number
doctors
secretary
labor
advisory
commission
mine
workers
america
retiree
health
benefits
coal
commission
report
coal
report
app
hereinafter
app
late
health
care
pension
rights
become
issue
miners
central
demand
collective
bargaining
rallying
cry
urged
nationwide
coal
strike
fox
stand
krajcinovic
company
doctors
managed
care
seltzer
fire
hole
zieger
john
lewis
labor
leader
see
also
ante
john
lewis
head
umwa
urged
mine
owners
fear
sudden
death
minds
know
occurs
families
provided
proper
insurance
zieger
supra
workers
struck
government
seized
mines
government
together
union
effectively
imposed
managed
health
care
agreement
coal
operators
seltzer
supra
resulting
agreement
created
medical
hospital
fund
designed
provide
arrange
availability
medical
hospital
related
services
miners
dependents
krug
lewis
agreement
app
one
year
later
fund
consolidated
welfare
retirement
fund
also
established
fund
national
bituminous
coal
wage
agreement
nbcwa
app
successive
agreements
fund
three
trustees
union
management
neutral
determined
specific
benefits
provided
plan
nbcwa
app
benefits
fund
provided
included
retiree
benefits
quite
similar
issue
bargaining
agreements
coal
operators
miners
nbcwa
fund
annual
reports
make
clear
fund
provided
benefits
employees
families
dependents
medical
hospital
care
nbcwa
app
nbcwa
app
continuing
coverage
nbcwa
app
nbcwa
app
nbcwa
app
nbcwa
app
nbcwa
app
nbcwa
app
nbcwa
app
fund
annual
reports
specified
eligible
family
members
included
miners
spouses
children
dependent
parents
least
retired
miners
dependents
widows
orphans
period
fund
annual
report
app
fund
annual
report
app
also
noting
unprecedented
magnitude
liberality
fund
hospital
medical
care
program
fund
annual
report
app
fund
annual
report
app
fund
annual
report
app
fund
annual
report
app
fund
annual
report
app
fund
annual
report
app
fund
annual
report
app
fund
annual
report
app
see
also
hearings
health
benefits
suggesting
retirees
eligible
inception
bargained
benefits
significant
difference
coverage
provided
consists
greater
generosity
respect
widows
earlier
limitation
repealed
health
benefits
extended
widows
remarriage
death
see
nbcwa
app
return
miners
thought
assurance
though
contractual
obligation
management
continued
pension
health
care
benefits
union
agreed
accept
mechanization
mining
concession
meant
significant
layoffs
smaller
future
workforce
coal
report
app
decline
employment
krajcinovic
supra
seltzer
supra
see
also
perry
collective
bargaining
decline
mine
workers
detailing
benefits
mechanization
coal
operators
president
southern
coal
operators
association
said
miners
promised
grown
accustomed
health
benefits
app
benefits
management
fund
trustee
said
covered
mine
worker
including
pensioners
dependents
without
limit
duration
said
umwa
agreed
oppose
rapid
mechanization
mines
exchange
increased
wages
payments
welfare
fund
mine
workers
pennington
see
also
id
goldberg
concurring
judgment
improved
wages
benefits
working
conditions
quid
pro
quo
automation
others
reached
similar
conclusions
coal
commission
recently
said
retired
coal
miners
legitimate
expectations
health
care
benefits
life
promise
received
working
lives
planned
retirement
years
commitment
honored
numerous
supporters
present
law
read
history
showing
example
miners
went
work
day
assumption
health
benefits
retired
cong
rec
wofford
see
also
id
rockefeller
act
see
promise
health
care
kept
tens
thousands
retired
coal
miners
families
id
byrd
coal
act
assure
retired
coal
miners
promises
made
working
years
reneged
upon
id
ford
coal
act
assures
promise
made
retirees
kept
id
conference
report
coal
act
nbcwa
retirees
dependents
promised
lifetime
health
care
benefits
federal
government
played
significant
role
developing
expectations
promises
created
mentioned
strike
related
health
pension
benefits
government
seized
mines
imposed
agreement
established
basic
health
benefits
framework
supra
see
also
fed
reg
president
truman
seizure
order
strike
related
pension
benefits
government
intervened
ensure
continued
availability
benefits
fed
reg
executive
order
creating
board
inquire
strike
krajcinovic
supra
later
years
congress
provided
fund
special
tax
benefits
helped
fund
build
hospitals
established
health
safety
standards
brief
respondents
umwa
combined
benefit
fund
et
al
citing
relevant
statutes
record
materials
kind
government
intervention
explains
president
southern
coal
producers
association
said
benefits
reduced
entirely
conceivable
congress
step
take
mines
assuming
responsibility
welfare
collections
payment
repeat
federal
government
words
deeds
along
industry
necessarily
create
contractually
binding
promises
existed
might
eliminated
need
legislation
labor
relations
human
relations
one
create
promises
understandings
even
absence
legally
enforceable
contract
others
reasonably
expect
honored
indeed
labor
relations
understandings
may
spell
difference
labor
war
labor
peace
parties
may
look
strike
enforcement
kind
important
mutual
understanding
issue
record
shows
statements
conduct
led
management
understand
labor
legitimately
expect
health
care
benefits
retirees
dependents
continue
provided
finally
eastern
continued
obtain
profits
coal
mining
industry
long
operated
wholly
owned
subsidiary
eastern
associated
coal
eacc
late
eastern
effectively
ran
eacc
sharing
officers
supervising
management
receiving
eacc
approximately
million
dividends
brief
petitioner
app
affidavit
gallagher
eacc
general
counsel
eastern
corporate
cash
manual
see
also
noting
eastern
profits
control
eacc
eastern
officials
role
eacc
directors
ratified
bargaining
agreements
brief
bituminous
coal
operators
association
amicus
curiae
brief
respondent
peabody
holding
et
al
must
remained
aware
fund
deepening
financial
crisis
taken
together
circumstances
explain
fundamentally
unfair
congress
impose
upon
eastern
liability
future
health
care
costs
miners
long
ago
imposing
liability
example
upon
present
industry
coal
consumers
taxpayers
diminishes
reasonableness
eastern
expectation
leaving
industry
fall
within
constitution
protection
unfairly
retroactive
liability
circumstances
elaborated
record
mean
eastern
knew
potential
funding
problems
arise
multiemployer
benefit
plan
see
concrete
pipe
left
industry
eastern
knew
known
light
structure
benefit
plan
frequency
coal
operators
went
business
last
man
problem
exacerbate
health
plan
funding
difficulties
see
boone
report
xvi
house
report
coal
commission
report
health
benefits
retired
coal
miners
hearing
subcommittee
medicare
longterm
care
senate
committee
finance
statement
coal
commission
vice
chairman
henry
perritt
eastern
also
knew
known
prior
federal
involvement
future
federal
intervention
solve
problem
serious
possibility
supra
see
also
concrete
pipe
supra
connolly
usery
eastern
knew
nature
problem
legislative
effort
solve
problem
well
occur
many
years
future
importantly
eastern
played
significant
role
creating
miners
expectations
led
legislation
add
circumstances
two
others
eastern
benefited
labor
miners
whose
future
health
care
must
provide
eastern
remained
industry
drawing
substantial
profits
though
business
subsidiary
usually
always
insulates
owner
liability
upshot
follow
form
analysis
used
connolly
say
government
regulation
unfairly
interfered
eastern
distinct
expectations
see
connolly
supra
analyzing
taking
terms
three
factors
economic
impact
interference
distinct
expectations
governmental
action
citations
omitted
within
framework
find
additional
support
constitutionality
reachback
liability
provision
adding
character
governmental
action
amounts
creation
liability
third
party
direct
taking
interest
physical
property
fact
statute
narrows
eastern
liability
employed
explicitly
preserving
eastern
rights
indemnification
others
thereby
helping
eastern
spread
risk
liability
helps
diminish
act
economic
impact
upon
eastern
well
put
matter
directly
however
law
imposes
upon
eastern
burden
showing
statute
retroactive
effect
fundamentally
unfair
unjust
circumstances
mentioned
convince
eastern
show
sufficiently
reasonable
expectation
remain
free
future
health
care
cost
liability
workers
employed
eastern
therefore
failed
show
law
unfairly
upset
legitimately
settled
expectations
view
eastern
met
burden
uphold
reachback
provision
coal
act
constitutional
eastern
enterprises
petitioner
kenneth
apfel
commissioner
social
security
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
first
circuit
june
justice
kennedy
concurring
judgment
senting
part
plurality
careful
assessment
history
purpose
statute
question
demonstrates
necessity
hold
arbitrary
beyond
legitimate
authority
government
enact
view
full
accord
many
plurality
conclusions
relevant
portions
coal
industry
retiree
health
benefit
act
coal
act
et
seq
ed
supp
ii
must
invalidated
contrary
essential
due
process
principles
without
regard
takings
clause
fifth
amendment
concur
judgment
holding
coal
act
unconstitutional
disagree
plurality
takings
clause
analysis
submitted
incorrect
quite
unnecessary
decision
case
must
record
respectful
dissent
issue
final
clause
fifth
amendment
shall
private
property
taken
public
use
without
compensation
provision
known
takings
clause
con
cept
taking
clause
become
term
art
discussion
begins
cases
support
plurality
conclusion
coal
act
takes
property
coal
act
imposes
staggering
financial
burden
petitioner
eastern
enterprises
regulates
former
mine
owner
without
regard
property
operate
upon
alter
identified
property
interest
applicable
measured
property
interest
coal
act
appropriate
transfer
encumber
estate
land
lien
particular
piece
property
valuable
interest
intangible
intellectual
property
even
bank
account
accrued
interest
law
simply
imposes
obligation
perform
act
payment
benefits
statute
indifferent
regulated
entity
elects
comply
property
uses
extent
affects
property
interests
manner
similar
many
laws
today
none
thought
constitute
takings
call
sort
governmental
action
taking
matter
constitutional
interpretation
imprecise
due
respect
unwise
role
government
expanded
experience
taught
strict
line
taking
regulation
difficult
discern
maintain
led
pennsylvania
coal
mahon
try
span
two
concepts
specific
property
subjected
owner
alleged
excessive
regulation
general
rule
least
property
may
regulated
certain
extent
regulation
goes
far
recognized
taking
quoted
sentence
course
genesis
regulatory
takings
doctrine
see
lucas
south
carolina
coastal
council
prior
justice
holmes
exposition
pennsylvania
coal
mahon
generally
thought
takings
clause
reached
appropriation
property
functional
equivalent
ouster
owner
possession
citations
omitted
without
denigrating
importance
regulatory
taking
concept
assumed
law
fair
say
proven
difficult
explain
theory
implement
practice
cases
attempting
decide
regulation
becomes
taking
among
litigated
perplexing
current
law
see
penn
central
transp
new
york
city
question
constitutes
purposes
fifth
amendment
proved
problem
considerable
difficulty
kaiser
aetna
regulatory
taking
question
requires
essentially
ad
hoc
factual
inquir
today
however
one
constant
limitation
cases
regulatory
taking
analysis
employed
specific
property
right
interest
stake
decision
pennsylvania
coal
mahon
supra
confronted
cases
specific
identified
properties
property
rights
alleged
come
within
regulatory
takings
prohibition
air
rights
buildings
penn
central
supra
zoning
parcels
real
property
macdonald
sommer
frates
yolo
county
agins
city
tiburon
trade
secrets
ruckelshaus
monsanto
right
access
property
pruneyard
shopping
center
robins
kaiser
aetna
supra
right
affix
structures
loretto
teleprompter
manhattan
catv
right
transfer
property
devise
intestacy
hodel
irving
creation
easement
dolan
city
tigard
nollan
california
coastal
right
build
improve
lucas
supra
liens
real
property
armstrong
right
mine
coal
keystone
bituminous
coal
assn
debenedictis
right
sell
personal
property
andrus
allard
right
extract
mineral
deposits
goldblatt
hempstead
central
eureka
mining
regulations
cited
cases
challenged
excessive
destroy
take
specific
property
interest
plurality
opinion
disregards
requirement
removing
constant
characteristic
takings
analysis
expand
already
difficult
uncertain
rule
vast
category
cases
deemed
law
implicate
takings
clause
difficulties
determining
whether
taking
regulation
even
property
right
interest
identified
counsel
extending
regulatory
takings
doctrine
cases
lacking
specificity
existence
least
outer
boundary
application
regulatory
takings
rule
provides
necessary
predictability
governmental
entities
definition
taking
binding
well
federal
government
plurality
opinion
throw
one
difficult
litigated
areas
law
confusion
subjecting
municipalities
potential
new
unforeseen
claims
vast
amounts
existing
category
cases
involving
specific
property
interests
obliterated
extending
regulatory
takings
analysis
amorphous
class
cases
embraced
plurality
opinion
today
true
burden
imposed
coal
act
may
great
government
appropriated
one
eastern
plants
mechanism
government
injures
eastern
unlike
act
taking
specific
property
incongruous
call
coal
act
taking
even
concept
expanded
regulatory
takings
principle
terminology
regulatory
takings
analysis
character
governmental
action
renders
coal
act
taking
property
usual
taking
occurs
government
physically
acquires
property
chicago
chicago
regulatory
takings
analysis
recognizes
taking
may
occur
property
appropriated
government
transferred
private
parties
see
security
industrial
bank
ur
cases
show
takings
analysis
necessarily
limited
outright
acquisitions
government
loretto
supra
transfer
physical
space
landlords
cable
companies
range
governmental
conduct
subjected
takings
analysis
expanded
however
careful
lose
sight
importance
identifying
property
allegedly
taken
lest
governmental
action
subjected
examination
constitutional
prohibition
taking
without
compensation
attendant
potential
money
damages
asked
challenged
governmental
action
implemented
particular
emphasis
extent
specific
property
right
affected
see
physical
invasion
government
action
unique
character
taking
without
regard
factors
hodel
supra
declaring
law
otherwise
taking
insignificant
economic
impact
taking
character
governmental
action
destroyed
right
pass
property
one
heirs
right
part
legal
system
since
feudal
times
penn
central
supra
may
readily
found
interference
property
characterized
physical
invasion
government
interference
arises
public
program
adjusting
benefits
burdens
economic
life
promote
common
good
citation
omitted
coal
act
neither
targets
specific
property
terest
depends
upon
particular
property
operation
statutory
mechanisms
liability
imposed
eastern
doubt
reduce
net
worth
total
value
said
law
adverse
economic
effect
circumstance
statute
take
money
government
instead
makes
payable
third
persons
factor
rely
upon
show
lack
taking
instances
government
may
make
evident
taking
occurred
webb
fabulous
pharmacies
beckwith
causby
government
capacity
give
immunity
takings
claim
device
requiring
transfer
property
one
private
owner
directly
another
cf
hawaii
housing
authority
midkiff
time
government
imposition
obligation
private
parties
destruction
existing
obligation
must
relate
specific
property
interest
implicate
takings
clause
example
security
industrial
bank
confronted
statute
alleged
destroy
existing
creditor
lien
certain
chattels
benefit
debtor
acknowledged
given
nature
property
interest
stake
resembled
contractual
obligation
takings
challenge
fits
awkwardly
analytic
framework
regulatory
takings
analysis
decided
analysis
apply
property
interest
traditional
property
interes
though
end
statute
found
inapplicable
lien
issue
holding
relied
louisville
joint
stock
land
bank
radford
invalidated
act
interfered
mortgages
farms
thus
worked
substantive
rights
specific
property
acquired
bank
prior
act
quoting
radford
supra
unlike
statutes
issue
security
industrial
bank
radford
coal
act
affect
obligation
relating
specific
property
interest
plurality
adopting
novel
expansive
concept
taking
order
avoid
making
normative
judgment
coal
act
fails
attempt
must
make
normative
judgment
events
see
ante
governmental
action
implicates
fundamental
principles
fairness
imprecision
regulatory
takings
doctrine
open
door
normative
considerations
wisdom
government
decisions
see
agins
city
tiburon
zoning
constitutes
taking
substantially
advance
legitimate
state
interests
sort
analysis
uneasy
tension
basic
understanding
takings
clause
understood
substantive
absolute
limit
government
power
act
clause
operates
conditional
limitation
permitting
government
wants
long
pays
charge
clause
presupposes
government
intends
otherwise
constitutional
language
indicates
frequently
noted
takings
clause
prohibit
taking
private
property
instead
places
condition
exercise
power
basic
understanding
amendment
makes
clear
designed
limit
governmental
interference
property
rights
per
se
rather
secure
compensation
event
otherwise
proper
interference
amounting
taking
given
constitutionality
coal
act
appears
turn
legitimacy
congress
judgment
rather
availability
compensation
see
ante
case
one
said
monetary
relief
government
available
remedy
appropriate
constitutional
analysis
arises
general
due
process
principles
rather
takings
clause
acknowledged
passages
cases
imposition
retroactive
liability
employer
withdrawal
pension
plan
might
give
support
plurality
discussion
takings
clause
see
connolly
pension
benefit
guaranty
corporation
concrete
pipe
products
construction
laborers
pension
trust
southern
connolly
said
definition
taking
controlled
set
formula
dependent
ad
hoc
factual
inquiries
circumstances
particular
case
applied
regulatory
takings
analysis
set
forth
penn
central
examines
economic
impact
regulation
extent
interferes
expectations
character
governmental
action
analysis
result
finding
taking
moreover
prefaced
entire
takings
discussion
admonition
surprising
discover
taking
instance
due
process
attack
rejected
see
see
also
concrete
pipe
supra
given
due
process
arguments
unavailing
surprising
indeed
discover
challenged
statute
nonetheless
violating
takings
clause
quoting
connolly
supra
best
connolly
equivocal
question
whether
apply
regulatory
takings
analysis
instances
like
one
us
reading
connolly
concrete
pipe
proceed
first
general
due
process
principles
reserving
takings
analysis
cases
governmental
action
otherwise
permissible
see
connolly
supra
ere
taken
nothing
use
nullified
contractual
provision
limiting
liability
imposing
additional
obligation
otherwise
within
power
congress
impose
see
also
duke
power
carolina
environmental
study
group
upholding
due
process
grounds
act
supp
placed
cap
civil
liability
nuclear
accidents
declining
address
petitioner
request
act
declared
taking
compensation
available
tucker
act
authorities
confirm
view
case
controlled
takings
clause
due
process
principles
respecting
retroactive
laws
given
view
takings
analysis
inapplicable
case
unnecessary
comment
upon
plurality
effort
resolve
jurisdictional
question
despite
little
briefing
parties
point
divided
courts
appeals
ii
constitutionality
coal
act
tested
due
process
clause
must
invalidated
accepted
principles
forbidding
retroactive
legislation
type
sufficient
dispose
case
although
hesitant
subject
economic
legislation
due
process
scrutiny
general
matter
given
careful
consideration
due
process
challenges
legislation
retroactive
effects
today
plurality
opinion
notes
centuries
law
harbored
singular
distrust
retroactive
statutes
ante
words
chancellor
kent
retroactive
statute
partake
character
mischiefs
ex
post
facto
law
every
case
relating
contracts
property
every
sound
principle
kent
commentaries
american
law
see
also
ibid
rule
retroactive
application
statutes
founded
english
law
principles
general
jurisprudence
justice
story
reached
similar
conclusion
retrospective
laws
indeed
generally
unjust
forcibly
said
neither
accord
sound
legislation
fundamental
principles
social
compact
story
commentaries
constitution
due
process
jurisprudence
reflects
distrust
example
usery
turner
elkhorn
mining
held
due
process
requires
inquiry
whether
enacting
retroactive
law
legislature
acted
arbitrary
irrational
way
even
though
prospective
economic
legislation
carries
presumption
constitutionality
follow
congress
legislate
prospectively
legislate
retrospectively
retrospective
aspects
economic
legislation
well
prospective
aspects
must
meet
test
due
process
justifications
latter
may
suffice
former
repeated
formulation
numerous
recent
decisions
given
serious
consideration
due
process
challenges
without
questioning
validity
underlying
due
process
principle
carlton
concrete
pipe
supra
general
motors
romein
sperry
hemme
pension
benefit
guaranty
corporation
gray
decisions
treat
due
process
challenges
based
retroactive
character
statutes
question
serious
meritorious
thus
con
firming
vitality
legal
tradition
disfavor
retroactive
economic
legislation
indeed
accident
primary
retroactivity
precedents
upon
today
plurality
opinion
relies
takings
analysis
grounded
due
process
ante
citing
turner
elkhorn
gray
concrete
pipe
cases
reflect
recognition
retroactive
lawmaking
particular
concern
courts
legislative
tempt
ation
use
retroactive
legislation
means
retribution
unpopular
groups
individuals
landgraf
usi
film
products
see
also
hochman
constitutionality
retroactive
legislation
harv
rev
retroactive
law
may
passed
exact
knowledge
benefit
retroactive
laws
change
legal
consequences
transactions
long
closed
change
destroy
reasonable
certainty
security
objects
property
ownership
consequence
due
process
protection
property
must
understood
incorporate
settled
tradition
retroactive
laws
great
severity
groups
targeted
retroactive
laws
denied
protection
justified
fear
government
formed
protect
expectations
destroy
stability
investment
confidence
constitutional
system
secured
due
process
restrictions
severe
retroactive
legislation
case
us
represents
one
rare
instances
legislature
exceeded
limits
imposed
due
process
plurality
opinion
demonstrates
convincing
fashion
remedy
created
coal
act
bears
legitimate
relation
interest
government
asserts
support
statute
ante
tradition
degree
retroactive
effect
significant
determinant
constitutionality
statute
carlton
supra
darusmont
per
curiam
see
also
dunbar
boston
mass
holmes
plurality
explains
today
creating
liability
events
occurred
years
ago
coal
act
retroactive
effect
unprecedented
scope
ante
upheld
imposition
liability
former
employers
based
past
employment
relationships
statutes
issue
remedial
designed
impose
actual
measurable
cost
employer
business
employer
able
avoid
past
turner
elkhorn
supra
accord
concrete
pipe
supra
romein
supra
gray
supra
chancellor
kent
noted
uch
statutes
held
valid
clearly
reasonable
conducive
general
welfare
even
though
might
operate
degree
upon
existing
rights
kent
supra
coal
act
however
serve
purpose
eastern
coal
business
employed
many
beneficiaries
responsible
expectation
lifetime
health
benefits
perilous
financial
condition
plans
put
benefits
jeopardy
plurality
opinion
discusses
detail
expectation
created
promises
agreements
made
long
eastern
left
coal
business
eastern
responsible
resulting
chaos
funding
mechanism
caused
coal
companies
leaving
framework
national
bituminous
coal
wage
agreement
ante
case
far
outside
bounds
retroactivity
permissible
law
finding
due
process
violation
case
consistent
principle
deferential
standard
review
applied
substantive
due
process
challenges
economic
legislation
need
mathematical
precision
fit
justification
means
con
crete
pipe
citing
turner
elkhorn
statutes
may
invalidated
due
process
grounds
egregious
circumstances
case
represents
one
rare
instances
even
permissive
standard
violated
application
coal
act
eastern
violate
proper
bounds
settled
due
process
principles
concur
plurality
conclusion
judgment
appeals
must
reversed
footnotes
see
ante
plurality
opinion
joined
rehnquist
scalia
thomas
jj
ante
kennedy
concurring
judgment
dissenting
part
national
bituminous
coal
wage
agreement
nbcwa
signatory
company
shared
responsibility
creating
legitimate
expectation
among
miners
lifetime
health
benefits
imposing
liability
companies
profited
retirees
labor
found
rational
usery
turner
elkhorn
mining
every
signatory
company
including
plaintiffs
participated
creation
development
health
benefit
program
provided
lifetime
health
benefits
retirees
almost
fifty
years
congress
rationally
concluded
participation
led
legitimate
expectation
lifetime
health
benefits
honored
coal
act
light
arbitrary
draw
line
anywhere
nbcwa
signatories
plaintiffs
respond
nbcwa
clauses
nbcwa
miners
promised
lifetime
health
plaintiffs
never
made
therefore
argue
irrational
congress
require
contributions
signatories
fact
plaintiffs
never
contractually
agreed
provide
lifetime
benefits
rebut
rationality
finding
contributed
expectation
lifetime
benefits
coal
commission
congress
found
promise
lifetime
benefits
dates
back
even
though
explicit
nbcwa
davon
shalala
omitted
blue
diamond
argues
irrational
congress
impose
coal
act
liability
upon
blue
diamond
blue
diamond
promise
employees
receive
lifetime
health
benefits
undisputed
nbcwas
contain
explicit
promise
lifetime
benefits
nbcwa
agreement
however
several
federal
courts
found
mine
workers
america
umwa
members
legitimate
expectation
lifetime
benefits
nbcwa
based
various
funds
history
continuous
payment
benefits
statements
coal
industry
officials
davon
rationally
concluded
participation
nbcwa
benefit
funds
led
legitimate
expectation
lifetime
see
also
templeton
coal
shalala
supp
sd
ind
describing
basis
lifetime
benefits
expectation
congress
certainly
rational
basis
concluding
nbcwa
signatories
operators
agreed
bound
nbcwas
including
blue
diamond
contributed
toward
legitimate
expectations
umwa
members
blue
diamond
coal
accurate
claim
signatory
operators
executed
nbcwas
created
legitimate
expectation
lifetime
health
benefits
miners
congress
coal
commission
reviewed
historical
evidence
concluded
signatories
made
implicit
commitment
furnish
benefits
course
appellant
correct
insisting
commitment
distilled
congress
historical
data
made
explicit
text
nbcwas
written
eastern
reads
much
omission
sure
implied
commitment
might
enforceable
civil
suit
ex
contractu
constitutional
challenge
breach
contract
case
purposes
due
process
review
congress
determination
commitment
made
need
rest
upon
legally
enforceable
promise
enough
congress
conclusions
existence
effects
commitment
rational
commission
firmly
believes
retired
miners
entitled
health
care
benefits
promised
guaranteed
commitments
must
honored
retired
coal
miners
legitimate
expectations
health
care
benefits
life
promise
received
working
lives
planned
retirement
years
commitment
honored
today
expectations
commitments
jeopardy
secretary
labor
advisory
commission
mine
workers
america
retiree
health
benefits
coal
commission
report
quoted
app
may
well
true
majority
might
able
fashion
wiser
solution
difficult
problem
nevertheless
chief
justice
hughes
observed
dissent
joined
justices
brandeis
stone
cardozo
power
committed
congress
govern
interstate
commerce
require
government
wise
much
less
perfect
railroad
retirement
bd
alton