Palazzolo v. Rhode Island — Scalia, J., Concurring

Summary

Justice Scalia concurs in the judgment but disagrees with Justice O'Connor's reasoning regarding windfalls to subsequent purchasers. He argues that the existence of a regulation at the time of title transfer should not bar a takings claim, as investment-backed expectations do not include the assumed validity of unconstitutional restrictions. Justice Ginsburg, Justice Breyer, and Justice Stevens dissent, arguing the case is not ripe or Palazzolo lacks standing. Justice O'Connor concurs separately, emphasizing that timing matters but is not dispositive in the Penn Central analysis.