2 ms·
As you have eluded, the entire case arises from a fundamental contradiction: You cannot charge for access if you want to provide equal access. Any non-zero acce
by sytelus 8y ago
As you have eluded, the entire case arises from a fundamental contradiction: You cannot charge for access if you want to provide equal access. Any non-zero access fee will exclude some part of the population. Once you fix the law by stipulating that private property owners must ensure free access to the beach, Khosla has no case. If borders of the private property violates the constraints set in constitution, those borders becomes invalid.
I'm amazed that general public is US is perfectly fine with government charging public to enter in to their own public land, sometime with outrageous fees that would be unaffordable by people on subsistence and who would like to live off the grid. No one takes an issue that public is already paying taxes for this! Using public lands is not a privilege but the fundamental right of the people. In many European countries it is actually prohibited to charge access to public lands in their constitution.