Homeowners, Beware of "Economic Development"

Ah, it's the middle of June and the big decisions are starting to come from the Supreme Court fast and furiously. Today, the Court, by a slim 5-4 majority, held that local governments have the power to condemn private property and redistribute it in the name of "economic development." The case involved the Connecticut town of New London, which plans to revitalize its downtown by developing several business in and around the town's waterfront. In order to pursue the plan, the town needs to move out several long-time residents who don't want to move. The town sought to use the power of eminent domain to condemn those homes and move their owners (paying them for the value of the land, of course). The issue in the case was whether this sort of broad "economic development" scheme constitutes a "public use" for which private land can be taken according to the Fifth Amendment.

The majority opinion is very very deferential to legislative actions in this area, so much so that there doesn't appear to be much left of the Fifth's takings provisions. Although, to be honest, the dissenters have to go back to the original intent of the Constitution to come to a contrary conclusion, bypassing lots of precedent along the way. I mean, if the Court in 1984 signed off on the wholesale redistribution of land by the state of Hawaii to remedy inequities in the local real estate market, how could New London not buy off a few homeowners? In other words, Thomas and his ilk may be right, but it looks like the boat on this issue sailed a long long time ago.

Of course, I practice criminal law, so what the fuck do I know?