Introduction

On June 28, 2001, the U.S. Supreme Court rendered its long-awaited decision in Palazzolo v. Rhode Island.¹ This closely watched case promises to impact many individuals and groups with interests in land development, including landowners with wetlands, mineral rights' owners, landowners with designated "endangered" plants and animals on their lands, farmers, general land developers, environmentalists, and state and local government officials. Palazzolo is yet another sign of the general march of the Court toward stricter accountability for governmental land use decisions that adversely impact private property.

In the September 2001 issue of the Environmental Law Reporter, John D. Echeverria presented a Dialogue containing his Preliminary Assessment of the Palazzolo decision.² Echeverria's assessment (which more resembles the work of a haruspex than an objective observer) attempts to turn the Court's ruling on its head. Now, drawing on his candid recognition that he "may think somewhat differently about the case weeks, months, or years from now,"³ we would like to offer Echeverria (and other anti-private property rights advocates) some points to ponder as he (and they) contemplate the real meaning of Palazzolo.⁴