It involves "whether a Connecticut city can take away a person's home to clear the way for upscale development." In seriousness, it is not only for upscale development, but also whether the eminent domain power can be exercised to take someone's home or other property for "economic development" that will place the property in the hands of private developers, thereby creating jobs and resulting in more taxes being paid to the government's coffers. Is this exercise of the power of eminent domain for public use?The Supreme Court in Kelo will likely reassess the viability of Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff, 467 U.S. 229 (1984), a case decided by an 8-0 vote, with Justice Marshall not participating. The Hawaii Housing Authority opinion was written by Justice O'Connor.
Monday, December 06, 2004
Kelo v. City of New London, No. 04-108, which we reported on here, is one of the more interesting cases before the Supreme Court this Term. The Petitioners' Merits Brief in Kelo has now been filed. As we indicated in our previous post as to Kelo:
Posted by Tom Lincoln at 12/06/2004