Public Use | Kelo

Subscribe to Public Use | Kelo via RSS
Launch in external player

Missed the live blog and video of the oral arguments in Goldstein v. New York State Urban Development Corp., the latest case involving the controversial Atlantic Yards development and Kelo-like claims of eminent domain abuse in an economic development taking? 

Well, you’re in luck — the court has archived the video.

Launch the live blog and start the video at the same time and you can follow along with Timothy Sandefur, Mark Murakami, and me as we provide commentary.

To launch the video in a separate window, go here. Continue Reading Video Of Atlantic Yards Oral Arguments

It appears that the New York Court of Appeals live streams oral arguments, so tomorrow, for the second day in a row, we’ll go live with real-time blogging of an important and fascinating case (today we’re blogging oral arguments in the Hawaii Supreme Court on a land use case).

Starting at 2 pm EDT on Wednesday October 14, we’ll follow the arguments in Goldstein v. New York State Urban Development Corp., the latest case involving the controversial Brooklyn Yards development and Kelo-like claims of eminent domain abuse in an economic development taking.

Go to this pageto check if the viewer window works in your browser, and to sign up foran email reminder as the date approaches. Or, you can just come backhere on Wednesday when we go live at about 1:45 p.m. Eastern time. Thelive window will be the top post on the blog that day.

Continue Reading Wednesday, October 14, 2009, 2 pm EDT: Live Blog Of NY Court Of Appeals Atlantic Yards Eminent Domain Abuse Case Oral Arguments

Beginning at 2pm EST on Wednesday, October 14 (thanks, noLandGrab) the New York Court of Appeals will hear oral arguments in Goldstein v. New York State Urban Development Corp., the latest case involving the controversial Brooklyn Yards development and Kelo-like claims of eminent domain abuse in an economic development taking. 

This post at the Volokh Conspiracy has a good summary of the issues in the case, and why they are important. The merits and amicus briefs in the appeal are posted here.Continue Reading NY Court Of Appeals Oral Arguments In Atlantic Yards Eminent Domain Case


In today’s Honolulu Star-Bulletin, University of Hawaii lawprof David L. Callies responds to my September 20, 2009 review of Jeff Benedict’s book about the U.S. Supreme Court’s infamous Kelo eminent domain case, Little Pink House: a True Story of Defiance and Courage.

In In defense of taking land for public use, Callies writes:

First, as Thomas suggests, the U.S. Supreme Courtrelied on its earlier Hawaii Land Reform Act decision in deciding Kelo.But the Act does not permit the use of eminent domain by landowners. Astate agency – the Hawaii Housing Authority – condemned the land undersingle-family homes. No court has ever authorized the use ofcondemnation by private citizens.

Second,the Connecticut government redevelopment agency in the Kelo casecondemned the Kelo property in order to economically revitalize anentire neighborhood – not “to entice a major pharmaceutical company torelocate to New London.” The relocation was already a fact of…

Continue Reading Professor Callies’ Response To Little Pink House Book Review: New London’s Kelo Taking Was Not To Entice Pfizer

As I mentioned here, in August, I became the Chair of the Committee on Condemnation Law, a part of the ABA’s State and Local Government Law Section. The Committee includes some very experienced practitioners and scholars, private and government attorneys, and newer lawyers and law students looking to gain experience and a collegial network. The topics we follow are not limited strictly to “condemnation” or “eminent domain,” and include regulatory takings and inverse condemnation, and pretty much anything that can be of interest to condemnation attorneys.

We’re looking for ways to communicate better with committee members and disseminate information about upcoming CLE teleconferences (some low cost, and some free of charge), new decisions and developments in our area of law, publications, and so forth.

One of the ways is to revive the committee listserv (e-mail distribution list), which has lapsed into semi-dormancy in the last few…

Continue Reading Condemnation Law Committee – Come Join The Conversation

On October 16, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit will hear arguments in Rumber v. District of Columbia, No. 09-7035, an appeal challenging an attempt to take property by the District of Columbia and the National Capital Revitalization Corporation. Note: in 2007, the District abolished the NRDC, and the Districtsubstituted as the plaintiff in the eminent domain cases in the D.C.Superior Court.

The case arose from the attempt to condemn the Skyland Shopping Center,which is alleged to be a “blighting factor” to the surrounding area,and redevelop the property. The Washington Post reported on the situation here:

A powerful group of affluent Hillcrest residents has succeeded ingetting the city to declare eminent domain at Skyland — a controversialmove seen in no other commercial land deal in the District except thenew baseball stadium. Skyland will be demolished, under the plan, and ahigher-quality shopping center built…

Continue Reading D.C. Circuit To Consider Challenge To Use Of Eminent Domain To Replace “Lowbrow” Shopping Center With “Gentrified Shopping Experience”

Willets Point United has filed an amicus brief supporting their fellow New York City property owners in the public use case now pending in the New York Court of Appeals regarding the Atlantic Yards “redevelopment” project in Brooklyn, Goldstein v. New York State Urban Dev. Corp. As we noted here, Willets Point is under the takings gun itself, and has our Owners’ Counsel colleague Mike Rikon helping them (he also filed the amicus brief).

The brief argues that the Court of Appeals should not follow the Kelo rule of total deference to economic development takings: “The majority decision in Kelo v City of New London written by Justice Stevens was wrong, wrong in its holding and wrong on its facts.” Br. at 7. The New York Constitution’s public use clause prohibits economic development takings, and the brief walks through some of the more storied cases from that jurisdiction…

Continue Reading Amicus Brief In NY Court Of Appeals In Goldstein/Atlantic Yards Case: NY’s Public Use Clause Prohibits Judicial Rubber Stamp Of Takings

Justice Stevens’ majority opinion in Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005) held the government’s public use determination isoff-limits if thedetermination was the result of a “comprehensive plan,” regardless ofwhether than plan has any realistic chance of actually beingaccomplished. Thus, property owners can be forcibly dispossessed of their homes based merely on the government’s “belief”  and “hope” a planwill succeed:

TheCity has carefully formulatedan economic development plan that it believes will provide appreciablebenefits to the community, including–but by no means limited to–newjobs and increased tax revenue. As with other exercises in urbanplanning and development,the City is endeavoring to coordinate a variety of commercial,residential, and recreational uses of land, with the hope that theywill form a whole greater than the sum of its parts. To effectuate thisplan, the City has invoked a state statute that specifically authorizesthe use of eminent domain to promote economic development. Given thecomprehensive…

Continue Reading Kelo Reality Check: “Belief” And “Hope” Aren’t All They’re Cracked Up To Be

In yesterday’s New York Daily News, Dana Berliner of the Institute for Justice — the good folks who brought us Kelo — published “End eminent domain abuse: N.Y.’s highest court should rule against Bruce Ratner.” The latest Atlantic Yards case, Goldstein v. New York State Urban Dev. Corp., which is currently being briefed in the New York Court of Appeals prompts the op-ed:

It has been more than a generation since the state’s highest court has interpreted the New York Constitution’s provision that property may be taken only for “public use.” It’s time for the court to take a long, hard look – before more damage is done.

The fundamental legal question is whether the state should go along with the notorious 2005 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in Kelo vs. City of New London. In that ruling, the court said that using eminent…

Continue Reading Op-Ed On Eminent Domain Abuse At NY’s Atlantic Yards