For example, see the section about the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo on this wiki page:
Among other things Supreme court chief justice "Marshall concluded that Dartmouth’s [royal] charter constituted a contract and that New Hampshire had violated this contract in attempting to replace the original trustees." https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/729/dartmouth-c...
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-04-59
Here in NM, a significant number the original Spanish land grants were ignored and replaced by new grants to (generally) Anglo owners. Fortunately, some of them were sufficiently cogniscent of the paradox of colonialism overriding colonialism that the new grantees re-issued (smaller) grants back to the owners under Spanish or Mexican law.
Ironically, there were also some Spanish land grants that took so long to process, Mexico had already declared independence from Spain before the legal process was complete, and this left a number of them in a strange form of legal limbo at the time of the treaty.
It worked in negative ways too. The Dutch setup a feudal system, but the state limited the ability of the landowner to collect rent in the 19th century. (Baltimore has a system like this too) In this case, the landlords abandoned the title, but many homeowners were in a legal limbo where they didn’t have a clean title.
https://malegislature.gov/Laws/Constitution#chapterVSectionI
Chapter V, Section I, Article I:
> it is declared, that the President and Fellows of Harvard College,in their corporate capacity, and their successors in that capacity, their officers and servants, shall have, hold, use, exercise and enjoy, all the powers, authorities, rights, liberties, privileges, immunities and franchises, which they now have or are entitled to have, hold, use, exercise and enjoy: and the same are hereby ratified and confirmed unto them, the said president and fellows of Harvard College, and to their successors, and to their officers and servants, respectively, forever.
Chapter V, Section I, Article II:
> And whereas there have been at sundry times, by divers persons, gifts, grants, devises of houses, lands, tenements, goods, chattels, legacies and conveyances, heretofore made, either to Harvard College in Cambridge, in New England, or to the president and fellows of Harvard College, or to the said college, by some other description, under several charters successively: it is declared, that all the said gifts, grants, devises, legacies and conveyances, are hereby forever confirmed unto the president and fellows of Harvard College, and to their successors in the capacity aforesaid, according to the true intent and meaning of the donor or donors, grantor or grantors, devisor or devisors.
In most places... which is your first point.
One of the science fiction authors that I've read has run in to this - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Alec_Effinger
> Throughout his life, Effinger suffered from health problems. These resulted in enormous medical bills which he was unable to pay, resulting in a declaration of bankruptcy. Because Louisiana's system of law descends from the Napoleonic Code rather than English Common Law, the possibility existed that copyrights to Effinger's works and characters might revert to his creditors, in this case the hospital. However, no representative of the hospital showed up at the bankruptcy hearing, and Effinger regained the rights to all his intellectual property.
https://www.louisiana.gov/about-louisiana/
> Early French and Spanish settlers influenced the legal system in Louisiana. Despite popular belief, it is incorrect to say that the Louisiana Civil Code is, or stems from, the Napoleonic Code. Although the developing Napoleonic Code influenced Louisiana law, the Napoleonic Code was not enacted until 1804, one year after the Louisiana Purchase. A main source of Louisiana jurisprudence may in fact be Spanish. The resulting system of "civil law" in the Louisiana does differ from the "common-law" systems in the other 49 states.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Louisiana
> Law in the state of Louisiana is based on a more diverse set of sources than the laws of the other 49 states of the United States. Private law—that is, substantive law between private sector parties, principally contracts and torts—has a civil law character, based on French and Spanish codes and ultimately Roman law, with some common law influences.
https://www.lawinfo.com/resources/bankruptcy/louisiana/
> Federal bankruptcy laws changed in October of 2005 when the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act took effect six months after President Bush signed it into law. This new law requires consumers who file bankruptcy to receive credit counseling in the six months prior to their filing for debt relief. It also mandated their completion of a financial management instructional course.
(interesting - the laws changed in 2005 - which may have been something sufficiently different... and he died three years before that law was changed)
https://www.bloomlegal.com/blog/what-is-unique-about-louisia...
> The most notable difference in procedure comes in the sphere of trust and estates law, real estate law, and inheritance. In Louisiana, we call this Succession and Donations, where it’s Trust and Estates in the rest of the country. Much of the legality surrounding the way land and property is passed down is unique to Louisiana.
https://www.nola.com/news/article_efcb7e79-99e1-53df-8e74-6b...
> So, Louisiana and the rest of the United States reached a compromise: Louisiana could continue to follow its civil law practices for private law, which governs interactions between individuals like marriage and succession, and Louisiana would have to use common law akin to the rest of the United States for public law, like when a person goes to criminal court and is prosecuted by the state.
(bankruptcy and property would fall under the civil law at the time)
Different Ivy League school, but established a precedent that states must respect preexisting charters.
But a good example are the ranchos in California. They were land grants by the Mexican government when it was Mexican territory. When the US acquired California after the Mexican-American war, the agreement was all such land grants were deemed valid going forward.
The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo has not been fully followed, even according to the US government.
> identifies and assesses concerns regarding acreage transferred voluntarily or involuntarily after the confirmation procedures were completed
"Involuntary transfer" is not what most people would describe as "respecting existing land grants".
I wouldn't say a few exceptions where challenges were faced mean the US didn't respect land grants. The paper itself says the vast majority has no issues.
Sec. 3. University of Minnesota. All the rights, immunities, franchises and endowments heretofore granted or conferred upon the University of Minnesota are perpetuated unto the university.
Interestingly enough, Section 4 immediately following invests the state with eminent domain power.
This excellent article by the legal research team describes the scope of the University's powers and cites key legal cases that have helped define it. https://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/pubs/ss/clssumca.pdf
There are plenty of parcels of land whose title is literally a pre-Revolution Crown Grant. That matters not a whit with respect to eminent domain. (OK - maybe not plenty but at least two.)
That would carry less weight - George Washington never had monarchical or dictatorial powers to grant such an exemption.
This matters in Louisiana, which has a civil and not a common law system, dating from the French period.
I'm quite positive the United States doesn't give legal credence to "dusty old letters from King George".