Kelo v. City of New London

Freedom4all

Veteran
Apr 18, 2009
767
0
There was a much publicized eminent domain (land confiscation) case back in 2005 that eventually ended up with a Supreme Court ruling. Video Background

Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005) was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States involving the use of eminent domain to transfer land from one private owner to another to further economic development. The case arose from the condemnation by New London, Connecticut, of privately owned real property so that it could be used as part of a comprehensive redevelopment plan. The Court held in a 5–4 decision that the general benefits a community enjoyed from economic growth qualified such redevelopment plans as a permissible "public use" under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

In New London the city's prized economic development plan has fallen apart as the economy crumbled.

The Corcoran Jennison Cos., a Boston-based developer, had originally locked in exclusive rights to develop nearly the entire northern half of the Fort Trumbull peninsula.

But those rights expired in June 2008, despite multiple extensions, because the firm was unable to secure financing, according to President Marty Jones.

In July, backers halted fundraising for the project's crown jewel, a proposed $60 million, 60,000-square-foot Coast Guard museum.

Her beloved pink house was sold for a dollar and moved less than two miles away, where a local preservationist has refurbished it.

Government is good? Not so much.
 
Government is good? Not so much.


This was all based upon a municipal-level action plan. Most people who are against BIG-government want the power balanced more towards state and local governments (or as some would say, the People). While I consider myself pro states' rights, I recognize that things like this happen even when, often, such issues are outside of the purview of the Federal Government.
 
This was all based upon a municipal-level action plan. Most people who are against BIG-government want the power balanced more towards state and local governments (or as some would say, the People). While I consider myself pro states' rights, I recognize that things like this happen even when, often, such issues are outside of the purview of the Federal Government.
You are correct.

Some have no clue as they argue Federal Government Bad, yet then start complaining when those powers are ceded back to the States.

Eminent Domain and Health Care Portability are two big issues that ignorant people argue from both sides of the coin.
 
I just wonder how long it's going to be before a politician gets caught taking a bribe from a developer wanting private land to "develop".
 

Latest posts

Back
Top