In a five-to-four ruling, the high court held in Kelo v. City of New London , S. At issue was the scope of the Fifth Amendment to the U. New London, Connecticut had fallen on hard economic times. The city was economically distressed after its last major employer, the U. Naval Undersea Warfare Center, closed in Its tax base and population were continually decreasing, and city leaders were desperate for some form of economic development. In , the pharmaceutical giant Pfizer began construction of a major research facility on the outskirts of the Fort Trumbull neighborhood of New London.
Seeing an opportunity, the city activated the New London Development Corporation, a private entity under the control of the city government, to consider plans to redevelop the area and encourage new economic activities that might be brought in by the Pfizer plant. The development corporation created a development plan that included a resort waterfront hotel and conference center New London is located on both the Thames River and Long Island Sound , a new state park, new residences, and various research, office and retail spaces.
In , New London approved the development plan, which was projected to create numerous jobs, increase taxes and other revenues and revitalize the economically distressed city, including its downtown and waterfront areas. Kelo, the lead plaintiff, owned a small home on the Thames River. Although the trial court granted a permanent restraining order prohibiting the taking of certain property, the Connecticut Supreme Court, relying on U.
Supreme Court cases such as Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff , U. Parker , U. The U. Historically, eminent domain has been used to take private property for highways and other public works. Over the years, state and local governments slowly extended their use of eminent domain, frequently to include economic development purposes. But a backlash was brewing. In , the Michigan Supreme Court overturned Poletown and blocked the condemnation of small businesses surrounding a county airport.
The Kelo case thus became the focus of vigorous discussion and debate by supporters on both sides. Some 40 amicus curiae briefs were filed in the case, including 25 on behalf of the petitioners by various nonprofit, public policy and public rights organizations, including the NAACP and AARP. The Kelo case was argued before the Supreme Court on February 22, Interestingly, the argument was heard by only seven members of the Court. Although absent from the oral argument, Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justice Stevens read the briefs and oral argument transcripts and participated in the decision.
