The Supreme Court decided in support of Eminent Domain. Justice [John Paul Stevens] was joined in the majority by Justices [Anthony Kennedy], [David Souter], [Ruth Bader Ginsburg] and [Stephen Breyer]. Justice [Sandra Day O Connor]'s fellow dissenters were Chief Justice [William Rehnquist] and Justices [Antonin Scalia] and [Clarence Thomas]. Note the "liberals" supporting the taking of property by the government. This is KeLo - z2005-02-23- Kelo New London Eminent Domain.

The NyTimes supports the decision, but David at [Blue Mass] notes there's a Conflict Of Interest there...

David Sucher points to an argument by [Robert Ellickson] supporting the decision on the basis of Federal Ism. I'd prefer that the main battlegrounds on eminent domain issues be city halls, state capitals, and state supreme courts, not the federal courts. [Ilya Somin] counters Decentralized federalism works well in situations where citizens can "vote with their feet" in opposition to policies that oppress or harm them... By its very nature, land is immobile. Therefore, voting with my feet won't help if the City of Falls Church (where I live) decides to condemn my home. I think there's a Rule Of Law issue here, where Eminent Domain is an inherently arbitrary process of undercutting fundamental Property Rights.

July'2005 update: the city of [New London] is now talking of charging the residents of the homes back-rent.

User Options Recent Changes Help Page