Randal O'Toole, Cato Institute Fellow and blogger provides an update on the situation in New London, where Suzette Kelo and the other property owners have been evicted but there's been no development on the land. The Supreme Court's affirmation argued that there was a significant economic benefit to be realized and that it shouldn't be the Court's role to review every city's case for economic development.
So unfortunately we won't be seeing any of this in the USA anytime soon.
1 comment:
After researching this topic extenisvely for my last paper, I am dissapointed that the redevelopment is failing. I believe that Kelo should have won the case because the economic development does not count as a "public use." Since the Court ruled the way it did, I would have hoped that at least the city would prosper after invoking eminent domain on good conditioned homes that did not need to be condemned.
The Court will certainly have to deal with more eminent domain cases in the future because of the nonrestrictive precedent that it set in this case.
Post a Comment