Advertise:   ads@blueearthmarketing.com   712.224.5420

Law
Supreme Court rules in property rights dispute


The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that local governments make seize land from property owners to further an economic development interest.

The 5-4 ruling affirmed the Fifth Amendment allows local governments to exercise eminent domain for public use. "Promoting economic development is a traditional and long accepted function of government," Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the majority.

A strong dissent was filed by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. "Nothing is to prevent the State from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton, any home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a factory," she wrote in an opinion joined by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, who are usually considered the most conservative.

Thomas also filed a dissent. He argued that the majority has wrongly expanded the use of eminent domain.

"If such 'economic development' takings are for a 'public use,' any taking is," he wrote.

Get the Story:
Justices Affirm Property Seizures (The Washington Post 6/24)
pwpwd
Justices Uphold Taking Property for Developing (The New York Times 6/24)
pwnyt
5-4, For The Takings (The Hartford Courant 6/24)

Decision in Kelo v. New London:
Syllabus | Opinion [Stevens] | Concurrence [Kennedy] | Dissent [O'Connor] | Dissent [Thomas]

Related Stories:
Miccosukee Tribe ordered to give up Everglades land (05/27)
House chairman shares common concerns (11/18)
Scalia springs pleasant surprise in tribe's case (3/24)
Group bolsters argument with Indian law (6/12)
Supreme Court rejects property-rights claim (4/24)
Supreme Court declines tribal challenge (3/19)
Supreme Court hears land rights case (1/8)
Tribes in middle of property-rights battle (1/12)