Remember the eminent domain case known as Kelo vs. New London? The Supreme Court voted in a 5-4 decision that New London, Connecticut was within their constitutional rights to condemn the property citing the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment, even though the property was transferred to another private party. This was all done under the guise of “community redevelopment”. Well, three years later:
Like so many other projects that use eminent domain and rely on taxpayer subsidies, New London’s Fort Trumbull project has been a failure. After spending $78 million in taxpayer dollars, the city of New London and the private developer have engaged in no new construction since the project was approved in 2000. Indeed, since the property owners disputing the takings owned less than two acres in a 90-acre project area, the city has always had a vast majority of the land available for development. Yet, no new development has occurred. The preferred developer for part of the site, Corcoran Jennison, recently missed its latest deadline for securing financing for building on the site and was terminated as the “designated developer.”
“New London’s Fort Trumbull project has been an unmitigated disaster,” said IJ Senior Attorney Dana Berliner, who litigated the Kelo case with Bullock. “Despite the infusion of close to $80 million in taxpayer funds and three years elapsing since the Kelo decision, there has been no new construction in the area and nothing to show but brown, empty fields. The developer was so desperate for funding that it applied to the federal Housing and Urban Development agency to obtain taxpayer-subsidized loans to build luxury apartments on the land where Susette’s neighborhood once stood.”
Not only did Suzette Kelo have her home and property forcibly taken away, the taxpayers have dumped $78 million into the boondoggle. But all is not lost:
The Kelo case sparked a nationwide backlash against eminent domain abuse. Since that ruling:
- 42 states have passed either constitutional amendments or legislation that provide greater protections for property owners facing eminent domain abuse.
- Two state supreme courts have rejected the ruling while four others have said they are likely do so in a future case.
- Property owners and community activists have stopped 23 projects throughout the country that abused eminent domain for private development.
Filed Under Front Page · · · ·
Print This Post ··
Comments
19 Responses to “For the Public Good”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...
What’s the status on having David Souter’s home taken by imminent domain and turned into a hotel?
I don’t know where open comments are, so please move this to the right spot.
Congressman Reyes, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, had a female relative kidnapped across the border. $30,000 was paid. ICE was involved and she was released.
http://beta.malaysia.news.yahoo.com/ap/20080626/twl-reyes-relative-kidnapped-1be00ca.html
Maricopa county scores again! Arizona employers are going to be very aware of whom they hire. Good Job Joe and the DA.
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2008/06/24/20080624indictments0624.html
LOL, AW. You got your morning news updates so ready you just can’t wait for the OC thread to open.
#1 Obviously the Souter home prject didn’t take off, maybe we should raise money for Suzette Kelo for a new home to thank her.
GJT - she’s still fighting against eminent domain abuse.
https://www.ij.org/keloday/index.html
#1 Well the guy is still around, got a website and clothing line out of it. He did try, not sure where the money goes.
http://www.freestarmedia.com/index2.html
Hamous
Ok, didn’t run into that.
GJT, I had posted a previous link that hasn’t gone through yet, with the words….. I don’t know where the open comments thread is, so please move this when you get it posted! hehe. yep, I wanted y’all to see a couple of things before I’m off to work. Have a great day.
#6 I wonder what an objectivist film is? (Benzion?)
http://www.fullcontext.org/Objectivism/aynrand.htm
Crooks in Connecticut? Double dealing, under the counter arrangements? Taxpayer funds siphoned off somewhere? I’m shocked, shocked.
Ilya Somin, George Mason University law prof, writing in Reason magazine about Kelo and subsequent protections passed by state legislatures:
If Texans think they are protected, they are wrong. And seriously, this is an issue Dan Patrick should take up in 2009. The loopholes to overrun individual property owners are still there and that law needs to amended now.
http://www.reason.com/news/show/119766.html
hamous;
Are you trying to imply that socialism doesn’t work whereas grassroots for individual rights do?
Good info hamous: The deal for me is : when Private Property rights are gone. We no longer own ourselves. I hope the people who lost their property can sue the city for ‘business as usual government bungling’.
Darren, did you catch my response on the Holocaust thread the other day?
Hamous, the other SCOTUS decisions kind of sucked the life out of this one. You should rerun it on Monday. It deserves more attention.
Big, it has become clear to me that many here are hellbent on wiping out any conservative agenda to teach the so-called RINOs a lesson. There is absolutely nothing I can say that will convince them otherwise. When this nation descends into a socialist cesspool all I can say is it is not my fault. I’ll sleep at night with a clear conscience…and my finger on the trigger.
Hamous, I don’t feel a need to sleep with my finger on the trigger. I have a 100 lb alarm system that works REALLY good!
#13 texpat
get after it! I hope Dan Patrick does take up the eminent domain fight. It really should be a part of the National elections also given the protection of our life, liberty and property ( I like the old wording best) as espoused in the Declaration!!! We may be on a roll after that second amendment decision today.