A Stitch in Haste

I previously blogged regarding eminent domain:

The fact that there are two different state constitutions at issue in these two cases could become irrelevant if the U.S. Supreme Court were to adopt the Hathcock reasoning as a Fifth Amendment eminent domain doctrine (which would then apply to the states via the Fourteenth Amendment).

Score one for me: The Supreme Court may soon have an opportunity to pre-empt state eminent domain law and nationalize the landmark Hathcock decision in Michigan that overturned the monstrous "Poletown doctrine" --

Ms. Kelo and the Derys are among seven property owners who refused to budge after city officials approved an economic development plan to upgrade their 90-acre waterfront neighborhood, known as Fort Trumbull, by creating prime office space, a hotel, 80 units of housing and a Coast Guard museum.

Because these people would not sell their property, the New London Development Corporation took title to it through eminent domain, a decision upheld in March on a 4-to-3 vote by the Connecticut Supreme Court.
...
[T]he Institute for Justice, a public-interest law center in Washington that represents Ms. Kelo and the other homeowners, has asked the United States Supreme Court to review the case.
...
In 1954, the last time the United States Supreme Court ruled on using eminent domain for development, the justices held that redevelopment of a blighted area constituted a "public use" for which property could be taken, expanding the scope of eminent domain beyond the building of a road or other public project.

But the institute contends that Kelo poses a novel question for the court - does "public use" include projects that are intended not to alleviate blight but to increase tax revenue and improve the local economy? States have been divided on this issue...

Besides the fact that the plain language of the Fifth Amendment clearly forbids "private for private" takings, the Court now has 50 years of data showing the fraud and failure of the excessive use of eminent domain. Hopefully the Court will grant certiorari in Kelo v. City of New London and pick up where the Michigan Supreme Court left off.

More from me on eminent domain and Poletown here. See also Alan Krigman's blog, Eminent Domain Watch, and Tim Sandefur's post on his role in the case.

Without property rights, no other rights are possible...

UPDATE: George Will has similar thoughts...money quote:

If the court refuses to review the Connecticut ruling, its silence will effectively ratify state-level judicial vandalism that is draining the phrase "public use" of its power to perform the framers' clearly intended function. That function is to prevent untrammeled government power -- in a word, despotism.

The column is a must-read as we approach the first Monday in October.

MAJOR UPDATE: The Supreme Court has granted certiorari in Kelo v. New London. This could be the single most important case the Court hears this year. Stay tuned.

(Cross-linked at Outside the Beltway.)