Eminent Domain – Kelo vs New London

Text:
In class we discussed fairness and division. A well know case involving property rights and eminent domain embodies the concept of fairness in the public stage. In the case of Kelo v. City of New London, the township expropriated several residents’ property to allow Pfizer, a pharmaceutical manufacturer, to build a plant. The idea was that the overall community would benefit from the additional tax revenue and additional jobs. The action was strongly contested by the residents and eventually made it to the Supreme Court. A highly controversial decision was made in favor of the township, requiring the residents to relocate. However, the issue is still being debated in the public domain. What is a fair allocation of property rights – at what point does community benefit become significant enough to suspend individual property rights. As a follow-up, Pfizer recently announced that it would not use the land in new London to build a new plant, and although the company has pledged to pay taxes on the vacant lot, New London will not see any of the jobs Pfizer would have brought.

References:
“Kelo v. City of New London” – June 23, 2005
<< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London>>

“Kelo v. New London” – June 24, 2005
<< http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/domaindebate.html>>

“Pfizer abandons site of infamous Kelo eminent domain taking” – November 9, 2009
<>

“Kelo v. City of New London, Connecticut (04-108)”
<>

“Pfizer's R&D Cuts Render Kelo v. New London Eminent Domain Case a Waste of Time” – November 10, 2009
<>

“Pfizer to Leave City That Won Land-Use Case”
<>