Kelo is actually an example of the system working.
Emineant Domain has long been allowed for economic revitalization, even for private development. Kelo cites several authorities that showed it was allowed even in the 1800's, and was hardly innovative. The Supreme Court ruled conservatively - that it wasn't their place to say it couldn't happen. The system then took over - and there are very few jurisdictions that will exert that power. Many states are quite likely to prohibit within their own constitutions the exercise of Eminent Domain under these circumstances - and they can do that.
The system worked.
And that's wrong. If private property can be taken by the state simply to generate more tax dollars, it really isn't private property any longer - and we have no real property rights and are one step closer to serfdom.
If you actually believe what you just wrote, we really don't have much of anything in common to discuss. Even O'Connor viewed Kelo as an abomination.
no way, Kelo violates the taking clause. state and local governments are corrupt, they will act in their own self interests to seize property.
"very few jurisdictions using that power"? I don't know where you are getting this from, its being used in waterfront property everywhere. people living along the water in new jersey, places like Long Branch and Neptune city, are being systematically run out of town using this practice. its happening in Florida to.
Basically, any "valuable" property is up for grabs. and that means waterfront, and that hits home for me personally.
Wrongo keebler!
The politically powerful have to change things...and developers have lots of money for both Dems and Repubs.
In Colorado, a 3rd generation landowner of 841 acres is preparing to fight off and ED attempt at grabbing 60 of her acres for a high school.
Right next door is King's Deer. I am unsure how many acres of 2.5 acre lots they have, but they are responsible for the need of a school...so why shouldn't the developer that built the homes SACRIFICE the land!!!