Also known as: public rights · jus publicum
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
2 senses
A right common to the general public. An unreasonable interference with such a right constitutes a public nuisance when the conduct produces significant effects on public health, safety, comfort, or convenience, violates a regulation, or continues with known long-lasting impact.
A right common to the general public. An unreasonable interference with such a right constitutes a public nuisance when the conduct produces significant effects on public health, safety, comfort, or convenience, violates a regulation, or continues with known long-lasting impact.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
A claim or dispute arising from a federal regulatory or benefits program. Congress may assign adjudication of such claims to non-Article III tribunals without violating the judicial power vested in Article III courts.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
A claim or dispute arising from a federal regulatory or benefits program. Congress may assign adjudication of such claims to non-Article III tribunals without violating the judicial power vested in Article III courts.
Each sense below has its own examples, sources, and questions.
Phoebe Park operates a large hog farm that sprays manure weekly near a public lake and campground. Strong odors and flies reach the park and rest area, causing nausea and forcing cancellation of community events. The farm's methods violate a state agricultural regulation on waste management near public spaces. The recurring invasions support a finding that the interference with the public right is unreasonable.
Priya Prasad, a lawyer, volunteers to represent a community organization challenging a local ordinance that restricts public access to a historic waterfront. The organization lacks funds to pay standard fees. Prasad provides the services without charge as part of her annual pro bono commitment. The work qualifies because it assists an organization seeking to protect a public right.
Perry Pratt's chemical plant releases pollutants into a river that flows to a public beach. The emissions continue for months and produce a permanent discoloration of the sand and water. Pratt knows from prior complaints that the discharge significantly impairs public recreational use of the beach. The ongoing and known effect on the public right supports a finding of unreasonableness.
Pedro Pacheco owns a factory that deliberately diverts untreated waste into a navigable river used by the public for fishing and boating. Pacheco knows the discharge will substantially interfere with those public uses. The purposeful conduct establishes that the interference with the public right is intentional.
Courts consider whether the conduct significantly affects public health, safety, comfort, or convenience, whether it violates a statute or regulation, and whether it is continuing or produces long-lasting effects known to the actor.
Supporting sources
Lawyers may count hours spent providing uncompensated services to organizations seeking to secure or protect public rights when standard fees would deplete the organization's resources.
Supporting sources
The plaintiff must demonstrate harm of a kind different from that suffered by the general public exercising the common right.
Supporting sources
Paragon Construction files for bankruptcy and asserts a claim against a federal agency for subsidy payments under a congressionally created agricultural program. The bankruptcy judge enters final judgment on the claim. Because the claim involves a public right created by federal statute, the non-Article III adjudication is constitutionally permissible.
Parker Phillips, a taxpayer, sues to enjoin federal spending on a program alleged to violate the Establishment Clause. The claim asserts injury to a public right shared by all taxpayers. The suit proceeds because it challenges congressional action under the taxing and spending power rather than a purely private dispute.
Congress may assign claims involving public rights that arise from federal regulatory or benefits programs to legislative courts or agencies, but it may not assign traditional common-law disputes between private parties.
Supporting sources
…he might deem necessary for the enforcement of the laws of the State, the preservation of order and the protection of public rights, and that there were no statutory restrictions in that State limiting the duties of the Attorney General in such case. Section 3 of chapter 227 of the General Laws of Minnesota, 1905 (same…