A new development project may finally build new housing on on property whose condemnation for purposes of "economic development" was upheld by the Supreme Court in a controversial 2005 decision.
Its existence was revealed when Justice John Paul Stevens' papers were made public earlier this week.
There are several interesting revelations, including an unpublished dissent by Justice Antonin Scalia.
The author of one of the Supreme Court's most widely hated rulings left us extensive files on the case, which have just been made public. They could help shed light on key unanswered questions about.
Supreme Court Historical Society Airing of "Little Pink House" (2017 Movie About Kelo v. City of New London), with Me as Commentator
This April 11 event is free and open to the public.
Under the Kelo v. New London Supreme Court decision, a state can take private land to give to a private developer for almost any reason it wants.
In this case, it enables the state to declare the area around Penn Station in New York City "blighted" and thereby authorize the use of eminent domain to take property for transfer to private interests.
Terrible Supreme Court Decisions that Should be Added to the "Anticanon" of Constitutional Law—Part I
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.
It's an indication that the notorious decision holding that the government can take property for private "economic development" may be vulnerable.
Lessons of an Effort to Compensate Victims of an Unjust Use of Eminent Domain a Century after it Happened
Los Angeles County, California, plans to return land unjustly seized from a black family in 1924.
Foxconn Debacle is Yet Another Example of the Dangers of Using Eminent Domain to Promote Economic Development
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
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.
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."
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.