Kelo v. New London
125 S. Ct. 2655 (2005)
U.S. Supreme Court affirmed decision of Connecticut Supreme Court, in favor of New London.
Case brief
Has the government changed "public use" to "public benefit" with regards to the use of eminent domain to seize property against the will of private citizens?
Eminent Domain has been used to justify acts of egregious violation of property rights in ever increasing quantities. Government, on a local and national level, seems to think that if they think your property can be put to "better" use than your personal use, it is theirs to take without your permission.
In Kelo v. The City of New London, a municipality was allowed to take the property of a community of residents so a commercial area could be developed. They wanted to take from free citizens and give to a private developer with the hopes that a large pharmaceutical company would be bringing more jobs and thus more business. Years after the court ruled in favor of the city, the job source has left town and the land has remained undeveloped.
Those accused of a crime are required to be assumed innocent, with the prosecution bearing the burden to prove him or her guilty. Likewise, the government should have to prove its use of eminent domain is completely justified, rather than requiring the citizen whose property is at risk to be in the weaker position. This is yet another example of the "government knows best" attitude. Laissez-faire is a far better option, unless a government can prove beyond a doubt that the property will be used for a bone fide and truly necessary purpose.
You can read a summary of the case here:
http://civilliberty.about.com/od/freetradeopenmarkets/p/kelovlondon.htm
Wall Street Journal Article
No comments:
Post a Comment