Eminent Domain Use and Abuse: Kelo in ContextDwight H. Merriam, Mary Massaron Ross American Bar Association, 2006 - 345 страници This book is a comprehensive analysis of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Kelo v. City of New London. It addresses the controversial and important question of when eminent domain may constitutionally be used to take property for projects that are not publicly owned and operated facilities, such as schools and town halls. The volume captures and conveys the context within which this debate is taking place as well as offers guidance concerning the Kelo decision itself and how it may be used. |
Съдържание
Public Use Does County of Wayne v Hathcock Signal a Revival of the Public Use Limit to the Taking of Private Property? | xxv |
Hathcocks Reversal of Poletown Returns the State to the Narrow View of Public Use | 3 |
B Poletown Neighborhood Council v City of Detroit | 4 |
C County of Wayne v Hathcock | 8 |
3 The Property Owners Arguments | 10 |
4 The Decision | 13 |
5 The Dissent | 15 |
IV The Public Use Issue Under Federal Law | 17 |
F Text of the Takings Clause | 113 |
G Potential Results of Hathcock | 114 |
V Conclusion | 115 |
Reforming Eminent Domain | 123 |
I Constitutional Text | 125 |
II History and Precedent | 126 |
III Public Policy | 128 |
IV The Problem Is Unjust Compensation | 130 |
Public Use Goes Peripatetic First Michigan Reverses Poletown and Now the Supreme Court Grants Review in an Eminent Domain Case | 29 |
I The Public Use Doctrine | 31 |
B The Impact of Poletown | 33 |
C County of Wayne v Hathcock Poletown Reversed | 35 |
II Kelo v New London | 38 |
III Conclusion | 42 |
Phoenix Rising The Rebirth of Public Use | 47 |
C Florida | 49 |
D Illinois | 50 |
F Kentucky | 51 |
G Maryland | 52 |
I New York | 53 |
J Ohio | 54 |
K Pennsylvania | 55 |
M Texas | 56 |
N Washington | 57 |
B Seventh Circuit | 58 |
E Illinois | 59 |
G Minnesota | 60 |
I New York | 61 |
K Virginia | 62 |
Poletown Overruled Recent Michigan Case Tightens the Reins on the Public Use Requirement Property Scholars Take Up Eminent Domain | 71 |
A Welcome Blow for Private Property | 77 |
What Should Replace the Rational Basis Test? | 79 |
The Misplaced Flight to Substance | 82 |
A Resurgent Public Use Clause Is Consistent with Fairness | 87 |
The Changing Landscape and Recognition of the Public Use Limitation Is Hathcock the Precursor to Kelo? | 93 |
A Recognized Governmental Power Subject to Theoretical Limitations | 95 |
B No Federal Limits on the State Legislatures Prior to the Fourteenth Amendment | 97 |
2 Public Use in the Destruction of Economic Dislocations Caused by Oligopoly | 98 |
D Lack of a BrightLine Test | 101 |
B Respondent City of New Londons Brief | 102 |
A Return to Reality and Constitutional Protection | 104 |
An Expansive Interpretation of the Public Use Clause | 105 |
Restricting Public Use | 106 |
1 Michigan Constitutional Provisions | 107 |
C Appellants Poletown Challenge | 109 |
D Wayne County Appellee Brief | 110 |
E Poletown Reversal | 112 |
Is Fair Market Value Just Compensation? An Underlying Issue Surfaced in Kelo | 135 |
II General Rule Regarding the Effect on Valuation of Governments Intended or Actual Use | 137 |
Scope of Project Doctrine and Precondemnation Blight | 140 |
A The Scope of the Project Doctrine | 141 |
B Precondemnation Activity | 144 |
IV Making Just Compensation Just | 146 |
V Conclusion | 152 |
The Friends of the Court The Role of Amicus Curiae in Kelo v City of New London | 163 |
III Potential for Abuse | 167 |
B Impact on LowIncome and Minority Communities | 169 |
C Personal Accounts | 170 |
V Judicial Review | 173 |
VI Just Compensation | 175 |
VIII Conclusion | 176 |
Kelo v City of New London A Tale of Pragmatism Betrayed | 193 |
A The Facts in Kelo Resonate with Legal Scholars and the Public | 194 |
B Four Opinions Four Perspectives | 195 |
1 Justice Stevens and the Living Constitution | 196 |
2 Justice Kennedy Remains Enamored with the Potential of Due Process | 198 |
3 Justice OConnors Distress with the Pragmatism She Wrought | 199 |
4 Justice Thomas and the Need for First Principles | 201 |
C Who Is Benefited by Condemnation for Retransfer and Why Does It Matter? | 202 |
2 The Relevance of a Comprehensive Plan | 204 |
4 The Irrelevant Quest for the Private Benefit Quid Pro Quo | 205 |
E Does the Right to New Property Exceed the Right to Traditional Property? | 206 |
F County of Wayne v Hathcock An Alternative Approach | 207 |
G The Transmutation of Private Ownership from Preventing Public Harm to Furthering Public Good | 208 |
Transcript of Oral Argument | 213 |
United States Supreme Court Decision | 243 |
Kelo in Context A Discussion with the Advocates | 289 |
How to Think About Kelo After the Shouting Stops | 319 |
I Kelos Meaning and Effect | 320 |
II Every Home at Risk? | 323 |
III Originality | 324 |
IV New Londons Dilemma | 326 |
V Eminent Domain Success Stories | 327 |
Best Practices for Eminent Domain | 330 |
INDEX | 333 |
Други издания - Преглед на всички
Eminent Domain Use and Abuse: Kelo in Context Dwight H. Merriam,Mary Massaron Ross Ограничен достъп - 2006 |
Често срещани думи и фрази
abuse Amici Curiae amicus briefs argued Berliner Berman and Midkiff blight Brief of Amici build BULLOCK citing city's Claremont Institute compensation Conn Connecticut Supreme Court constitutional Costco County of Wayne decision demnation determination dissenting economic development eminent domain power erty fair market value federal Fifth Amendment Fort Trumbull government's Hathcock Hawaii Housing Authority homes Honor HORTON interest issue judicial JUSTICE BREYER JUSTICE KENNEDY Justice O'Connor Justice Ryan JUSTICE SCALIA Kelo land landowner legislative legislature London mean ment Michigan Supreme Court National NLDC opinion parcel park petitioners Pfizer Poletown power of eminent private development private entity private party private property prop property owners property rights public benefit Public Power public purpose Public Use Clause public use doctrine Public Use Limitation public use requirement question redevelopment rule supra note take property Takings Clause tax revenue tion transfer Trumbull U.S. Supreme Court