Constitution Day is a good time to consider the issue of whether we have been overly accepting of some horrendous Supreme Court precedents. The Chinese Exclusion Case of 1889 is a great example.
A response to Jonathan Adler's attempt at an originalist defense of Kelo v. City of New London.
It's an indication that the notorious decision holding that the government can take property for private "economic development" may be vulnerable.
Los Angeles County, California, plans to return land unjustly seized from a black family in 1924.
As in many previous cases, government officials promised huge economic gains from seizing property for transfer to private interests - but failed to deliver.
The 4-2 ruling is reminiscent of the federal Supreme Court's dubious decision in Kelo v. City of New London, which also upheld a condemnation for a project that turned out to be a dud.
Today is the anniversary of one of the most controversial - and most unpopular - property rights decisions in the history of the Supreme Court.
It particularly emphasizes ways in which weak property rights harm the poor and disadvantaged.
I took part in panels on these topics at the recent Federalist Society National Lawyers Convention
An admirable man with a distinguished career as a Supreme Court justice. But also the author of some of the more problematic opinions of his era.
In his recent memoir, he admits he seriously misinterpreted precedent in one of his most controversial decisions, but maintains he still got the result right.
Fourteen years after the notorious Kelo case, the state where the case originated still has one of the nation's weakest eminent domain reform laws. A bill currently before the state legislature could change that.
A bill in the state legislature would stop cities from seizing property and handing it over to developers.
The factory stands on land seized in a taking that forcibly displaced over 4000 people, and attracted widespread widespread opposition. The lessons and legacy of the Poletown case remain relevant today.
The eminent domain reform bill is the same legislation that has passed the House three previous times since 2005. Each time, it died in the Senate without ever coming to a vote.
State and local officials are doling out $4.5 billion and 1,000 acres to lure the Taiwanese manufacturing giant.
Jeff Benedict, author of "Little Pink House," proposes that the City of New London return the land it condemned in the takings that led to the notorious Supreme Court decision in Kelo v. City of New London.
A low-budget account of the Kelo case sells out a 1,400-seat theater and gets the Megyn Kelly treatment plus a love-letter from George Will.
An impressive new movie dramatizes the story behind the famous Supreme Court case about whether it is permissible for the government to condemn homes in order to promote private "economic development."
The story of how the government can take your home against your will.
A new film dramatizes the landmark Supreme Court decision on eminent domain.
Governments in Georgia will be allowed to seize property for "economic development" purposes, undoing reforms passed in 2006 after the Kelo ruling.
Producer Courtney Balaker talks about new movie that will tell story of eminent domain abuse.