The US Supreme Court invited such abuses with its 2005 ruling in Kelo v. City of New London, which blessed the use of eminent domain to promote economic development by transferring property from one private owner to another.
The Institute for Justice, which represents Bowers, is asking the Supreme Court to clarify the limits of that license. Alternatively, it says, the court should overturn Kelo, which was 'wrong the day it was decided.'
In New York, the state appeals court noted, 'what qualifies as a public purpose or public use is broadly defined as encompassing virtually any project that may confer upon the public a benefit, utility, or advantage.'
Bowers argues this sort of reasoning is suspect even under Kelo, pointing out that the acquisition of private property in favor of a competing business poses significant risks to property rights.
Collection
[
|
...
]