navigation servitude
Definitions from Case Law · United States Supreme Court
Definitions from Case Law
From 204 U.S. 364 - Union Bridge Company v. United States · 1907Most cited · 720 citing opinions
no taking
All navigable waters are under the control of the United States for the purpose of regulating and improving navigation, and although the title to the shore and submerged soil is in the various states and individual owners under them, it is always subject to the servitude in respect of navigation created in favor of the Federal government by the Constitution. ... acts done in the proper exercise of governmental powers, and not directly encroaching upon private property, though their consequences may impair its use, are universally held not to be a taking within the meaning of the constitutional provision.
How the Supreme Court has restated “navigation servitude”
Each Supreme Court definition of “navigation servitude,” sized by how often later courts cited it. “Change” is measured by wording overlap with earlier definitions — a rough signal, not a semantic judgment.
How often courts cite the cases defining “navigation servitude”
Court decisions citing the 3 opinions that defined “navigation servitude” — 1,196 in all, by decade. Counts are citations to the defining cases as a whole, not verified uses of the term. The dip in the most recent years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the latest years.
All 3 definitions, chronological · 1907–1950
There was no actual taking of any of the claimant's property, nor any invasion or occupation of any of his land. Something more than the location of a harbor line across the land was required to take it from him and appropriate it to public use. The river being navigable and tidal, whatever rights he possessed in the land below the mean high-water line were subordinate to the public right of navigation and to the power of Congress to employ all appropriate means to keep the river open and its navigation unobstructed.
taking
It is not the broad constitutional power to regulate commerce, but rather the servitude derived from that power and narrower in scope, that frees the Government from liability in these cases. When the Government exercises this servitude, it is exercising its paramount power in the interest of navigation, rather than taking the private property of anyone.