Kelo v. New London

Because I can't resist throwing in my two cents: When I first learned yesterday that the Supreme Court said it's ok for the government to take private property from small, individual owners and give it to large, conglomerate owners so that those big owners can make tons of money from it, I was honestly a little conflicted.

On one hand, I'm happy to see the government exercise its takings powers for the public good. We take private property to an insane extreme in the U.S., and I like the government's takings powers because, theoretically, they put the public good over private profit in a very blunt and inescapable way.

That said, this decision is deeply offensive because it appears to turn that spirit of the takings clause and turn it against itself in a very perverse way. In short, Kelo basically builds trickle-down economics into the law of takings, and if you grew up in the 1980s under Reagan's “voodoo economics” (which is what George H.W. Bush called it) you'll know what that means: They're pissing on us! Or if you prefer another metaphor, the Supreme Court has said (once again) it's ok for government to give all the cake to those who already have the largest portions and we'll just hope that everyone else can survive on the crumbs that fall.

Awesome.

Ahem. If you'd like more erudite and measured discussion of the decision. don't miss the SCOTUSblog's metablog on Kelo. The decision itself is here from the LII.

And speaking of the LII, it is currently seeking donations. As far as I know, the LII was the first to have the Kelo decision available online, and that's just one of the invaluable services the LII provides. In the let-them-eat-cake economy of legal research, the LII is one way to make sure we get more than just crumbs, so please do your part to keep it healthy.

Posted 07:00 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack | law general