Heritage Foundation Leadership for America

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its decision in Kelo v. City of New London. We and other freedom-based groups watched this case closely and hoped for a decision that would put property rights and ownership above government planning and eminent domain. Today we were disappointed.

The case was brought by homeowners in New London, Ct. Officials sought to tear down a neighborhood to make way for a private office complex, which the town planners considered to be a higher use of the land. Background information on the case is available here.

The Fifth Amendment states, "Nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." This is known as the 'Takings Clause.' A ruling in favor of Kelo would have affirmed that the government's takings power is strictly limited to public projects, such as roads and other infrastructure, and does not extend to private development--even development that politicians think will be a better use of the land.

The case was litigated skillfully by the Institute for Justice, a libertarian public interest law firm. Their press release on the decision is here. In it, IJ describes the significance and far reach of today's ruling:

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court delivered a blow to home and small business owners throughout the country by allowing the government to use eminent domain to take homes so that businesses can make more money off that land and possibly pay more taxes as a result....

?One of the key quotes from the Court to keep in mind today was written by Justice O?Connor,? [Scott Bullock, senior attorney for the Institute for Justice] said.  ?Justice O?Connor wrote, ?Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random.  The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms.??...

Dana Berliner, senior attorney with the Institute for Justice, said, ?It?s a dark day for American homeowners.  While most constitutional decisions affect a small number of people, this decision undermines the rights of every American, except the most politically connected.  Every home, small business, or church would produce more taxes as a shopping center or office building.  And according to the Court, that?s a good enough reason for eminent domain.?

IJ's boldness of vision and leadership brought its clients to the brink of victory. We applaud their effort and the work of all those who worked to educate the Supreme Court on this case. We are pleased that we were able to lend a hand ourselves, by hosting a moot court before oral arguments.

IJ vows that it "will be there every step of the way with homeowners and small businesses to protect what is rightfully theirs" and plans to continue its litigation efforts in state courts.

A number of other groups have released statements on the decision. Here is a short list to start that we will update tomorrow:

American Conservative Union: Judicial Activism Strikes Again

Bluegrass Institute: Eminent domain ruling 'disasterous'

Cato Institute: Cato scholars condemn property rights decision

Goldwater Institute: Supreme Court Abandons Constitutional Limit on Government Power

More

Americans for Tax Reform: "Supreme Court Ruling on Seizure of Private Property Highly Disturbing"

Competitive Enterprise Institute: "Property Rights Devastated By Supreme Court Ruling"

Evergreen Freedom Foundation: "Supreme Court Fails to Protect Property Rights"

Foundation for Economic Education: "The Supreme Court and the End of Limited Government"

Mackinac Center for Public Policy: "U.S. Supreme Court Today Delivered Flawed Decision in Kelo v. New London"

National Taxpayers Union: "Supreme Court's Kelo Decision Trashes Taxpayer Rights as Well as Property Rights"