In 2005, in the case of Kelo v. New London, the Supreme Court allowed officials to seize and raze an entire neighborhood of well-maintained homes and businesses in the hopes that someone else could build fancier homes and businesses. According to the dissenters, the majority’s opinion effectively deleted the provision of the U.S. Constitution requiring that takings be for a “public use.” On this episode, we ask: what, if anything, is left of the prohibition on using eminent domain to take property from Person A merely to give it to Person B? And we look at some current litigation that can restore traditional limits on the government’s power of eminent domain.
Click here for transcript.
Resources
Dana Berliner, Looking Back 10 Years After Kelo
Gideon Kanner, The Public Use Clause: Constitutional Mandate or “Hortatory Fluff”?
Gideon Kanner, Do We Need to Impair or Strengthen Property Rights in Order to “Fulfill their Unique Constitutional Role”?
Brinkmann v. Town of Southold, NY
Fisher v. City of Ocean Springs, MS
Recent Episodes
Neat Takings Tricks | Season 3, Ep. 13
The Fifth Amendment says that the government must pay just compensation when it takes private property for public use, a command that, regrettably, is often […]
Listen NowTrust But Verify | Season 3, Ep. 12
In 1973, federal narcotics agents raided a pair of homes in Collinsville, Illinois by mistake. They didn’t find any drugs, but they did terrorize two […]
Listen NowEverything You Eat, Drink, and Wear | Season 3, Ep. 11
Government officials must obtain a warrant before forcibly entering a home (absent consent or an emergency). That rule goes back to the Founding. But in […]
Listen NowSpecial Weapons and Tactics | Season 3, Ep. 10
In 2020, a police SWAT team blew up Vicki Baker’s house after a fugitive barricaded himself inside. On this episode, we ask: who pays the […]
Listen Now