“Kelo v. New London”: An Ignominous End for One of the Supreme Court’s Worst Decisions
In 2005, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Kelo v. New London, using the powers of eminent domain to seize property from one private owner and hand it over to another private owner -- a developer who promised more than 3,000 new jobs and $1.2 million in tax revenue.
And now, as they say, the rest of the story:
. . . the city’s project has been a failure, with 91 acres of waterfront property sitting there empty and overgrown by weeds.
Now, we learn from the local newspaper, The Day, that following the hurricane Irene, the city has designated the Fort Trumbull redevelopment site as a place to dump vegetation debris. For a video of locals dumping that stuff on the site, click here.
Connecticut taxpayers have thus been soaked tens of millions of dollars, not just for nothing, but for making things worse — for transforming a nice local neighborhood into a dump.
- Comment (16)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (0)
Comments:
Re: “Kelo v. New London”: An Ignominous End for One of the Supreme Court’s Worst Decisions
This is what happens when government presumes to pick the winners.
Apr '11
Re: “Kelo v. New London”: An Ignominous End for One of the Supreme Court’s Worst Decisions
Agreed, and it's not the only example of such. Eminent Domain abuse has met spotty results nationwide, and developers promise of higher tax returns have no guarantees in the long run.
Mar '11
Re: “Kelo v. New London”: An Ignominous End for One of the Supreme Court’s Worst Decisions
Transforming waterfront property into a dump: Tens of millions
Ripping personal property rights from the hands of every American: Priceless
Aug '10
Re: “Kelo v. New London”: An Ignominous End for One of the Supreme Court’s Worst Decisions
RDAs. It's become a bigger and bigger threat to municipal wellbeing. It's ofttimes a fraud, almost always a drain on the public coffers, and rarely returns anywhere near what it has promised.
Redevelopment Authorities. Resist 'em. I think the market has a different name for them, 'cept the market doesn't necessarily speak in a language that public officials understand.
Jan '11
Re: “Kelo v. New London”: An Ignominous End for One of the Supreme Court’s Worst Decisions
I think the decision would be just as wrong had the project been successful. This does add insult to injury though.
Apr '11
Re: “Kelo v. New London”: An Ignominous End for One of the Supreme Court’s Worst Decisions
Well, ED decisions have been abused for some time, and I'm sure past "successes" opened the door to recent failures. Most likely the past successes have caused local governments to become increasingly fearless in the abuse.
Dec '10
Re: “Kelo v. New London”: An Ignominous End for One of the Supreme Court’s Worst Decisions
I studied this extensively for my senior seminar class, and the Kelo decision was simply the last in a long string of erronious decisions. The court started taking the nation off course early and at every opportunity to correct the trajectory only turned the nation farther away from its original direction. It sickens and saddens me. This is one of the best examples of where stare decisis should be completely disregarded. The dump at Ft. Trumbull is simply the inevitible outcome.
Dec '10
Re: “Kelo v. New London”: An Ignominous End for One of the Supreme Court’s Worst Decisions
I saw this and was saddened, though not surprised. I also think about the poor folks in NYC that were displaced to build the new NYT mausoleum, now that the NYT is a money-loser and doesn't pay those taxes or employ those people the City salivated over.
I am, of course, horrified over the Kelo decision, but I also harken back to what drives municipalities to even turn against their citizens, in the first place; it's the pensions and benefits they have had foisted upon them, by local governments long since out of office. Sure, the Supreme Court was absolutely wrong on Kelo, but our local governments, that we should have more and better control over, are what allow these cases to even reach the federal level. Shame on us.
Dec '10
Re: “Kelo v. New London”: An Ignominous End for One of the Supreme Court’s Worst Decisions
See? I told you God has a sense of humor.
Edited on September 3, 2011 at 4:15amDec '10
Re: “Kelo v. New London”: An Ignominous End for One of the Supreme Court’s Worst Decisions
Municipalities turning against their own citizens... very well-turned phrase, CJ.
-STB
Aug '10
Re: “Kelo v. New London”: An Ignominous End for One of the Supreme Court’s Worst Decisions
So, can Suzzette Kelo have her house back now?
Dec '10
Re: “Kelo v. New London”: An Ignominous End for One of the Supreme Court’s Worst Decisions
I think it's a museum or something now.
Feb '11
Re: “Kelo v. New London”: An Ignominous End for One of the Supreme Court’s Worst Decisions
Next time a serious Presidential candidate for the Republican is asked about a Supreme Court decision he or she does not like, say "Kelo vs New London".
Palin - think - failed this test during 2008. Terrible preparation on the part of her advisers.
May '11
Re: “Kelo v. New London”: An Ignominous End for One of the Supreme Court’s Worst Decisions
Once again Clarence Thomas was right. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/pdf/04-108P.ZD1
Mar '11
Re: “Kelo v. New London”: An Ignominous End for One of the Supreme Court’s Worst Decisions
This is why presidential candidates--or potential candidates--who have a history of supporting redevelopment agencies should be challenged on the issue. Remember when Ricochet was wishcasting a Haley Barbour candidacy. Barbour loves him some redevelopment. Ditto Rick Perry. A president who does not believe in property rights is a problem.
Feb '11
Re: “Kelo v. New London”: An Ignominous End for One of the Supreme Court’s Worst Decisions
Can we throw Steven's opinion in with the rest of the rubbish?