The Fifth Amendment
Nor shall private property by taken for
public use, without just compensation.
U N I V E R S I T Y of H O U S T O N
Professor Marcilynn A. Burke
Copyright©2009 Marcilynn A. Burke
All rights reserved. Provided for student use only.
Eminent Domain
A forced sale at a judicially determined
price, with compensation paid to the
original owner. The compensation
recognizes that the original owner had
an entitlement, but that entitlement was
only protected by a liability rule (as
opposed to a property right).
U N I V E R S I T Y of H O U S T O N
Professor Marcilynn A. Burke
Copyright©2009 Marcilynn A. Burke
All rights reserved. Provided for student use only.
1
Eminent Domain Query
Is the Fifth Amendment’s language
about public use a real constraint on
the government’s ability to exercise
the power of eminent domain???
U N I V E R S I T Y of H O U S T O N
Professor Marcilynn A. Burke
Copyright©2009 Marcilynn A. Burke
All rights reserved. Provided for student use only.
Kelo v. City of New London,
125 S.Ct. 2655 (2005), Casebook, p. 945
Eminent Domain &
Economic Development
• Berman v. Parker
• Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff
• Distressed municipality
• Bright line rule
• Alternative rule
The New York Times
U N I V E R S I T Y of H O U S T O N
Professor Marcilynn A. Burke
Copyright©2009 Marcilynn A. Burke
All rights reserved. Provided for student use only.
2
Kelo v. City of New London Cont’d
Eminent Domain &
Economic Development Cont’d
• Standard of review
• Concurrence
• Dissent
U N I V E R S I T Y of H O U S T O N
Professor Marcilynn A. Burke
Copyright©2009 Marcilynn A. Burke
All rights reserved. Provided for student use only.
Kelo v. City of New London Cont’d
Merrill’s Frameworks for “Public Use”
• Utilitarian
• Moral
• [Vulcan (the majority opinion)]
U N I V E R S I T Y of H O U S T O N
Professor Marcilynn A. Burke
Copyright©2009 Marcilynn A. Burke
All rights reserved. Provided for student use only.
3
Kelo v. City of New London Cont’d
Reactions
• Public
• Federal
• State/ Local
• New London today
C.M. Glover for
The New York Times
U N I V E R S I T Y of H O U S T O N
Professor Marcilynn A. Burke
Copyright©2009 Marcilynn A. Burke
All rights reserved. Provided for student use only.
Kelo v. City of New London Cont’d
Susette Kelo’s 2006 Christmas Card
to City and Development Leaders
Here is my house that you did take
From me to you, this spell I make
Your houses, your home
Your family, your friends
May they live in misery
That never ends
I curse you all
May you rot in hell
To each of you
I send this spell
For the rest of your lives
I wish you ill
I send this now
By the power of will.
U N I V E R S I T Y of H O U S T O N
Professor Marcilynn A. Burke
Copyright©2009 Marcilynn A. Burke
All rights reserved. Provided for student use only.
4
Poletown Neighborhood Council v.
City of Detroit,
304 N.W.2d 455 (Mich. 1981), Casebook, p. 954, n.2)
Eminent Domain
• Public use or private use?
• Heightened scrutiny
• Legislative deference
• Public benefit must be “clear and
significant”
Immaculate
Conception
Church
• Public interest is predominant interest
advanced
U N I V E R S I T Y of H O U S T O N
Professor Marcilynn A. Burke
Copyright©2009 Marcilynn A. Burke
All rights reserved. Provided for student use only.
County of Wayne v. Hathcock,
684 N.W.2d 765 (Mich. 2004), Casebook, p. Note 2, 954
Poletown Overruled
• 1,300-acre business and technology
park intended to reinvigorate the
struggling economy of southeastern
Michigan
• Two poles
• Transfer to private entity for public
use
• Transfer to private entity for private
use
U N I V E R S I T Y of H O U S T O N
Professor Marcilynn A. Burke
Copyright©2009 Marcilynn A. Burke
All rights reserved. Provided for student use only.
5
County of Wayne v. Hathcock Cont’d
Public Use
• May include a transfer to private entity
if—
• for enterprises generating public
benefits whose very existence
depends on the assembled land, or
• the private entity remains
accountable to the public in its use
of the property, or
• the land to be condemned itself is
based on public concern
U N I V E R S I T Y of H O U S T O N
Professor Marcilynn A. Burke
Copyright©2009 Marcilynn A. Burke
All rights reserved. Provided for student use only.
Physical Occupations and Regulatory Takings:
Categorical or Per Se Rules (3)
1. Permanent physical invasion by
government or authorized by
government = taking.
•
Loretto
2. Regulating a nuisance or public
bad ≠ taking.
•
Hadacheck
3. When the value of the land is
essentially wiped out = taking
(unless . . .).
•
Lucas
U N I V E R S I T Y of H O U S T O N
Professor Marcilynn A. Burke
Copyright©2009 Marcilynn A. Burke
All rights reserved. Provided for student use only.
6
Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp.,
458 U.S. 419 (1982), Casebook p. 960
Physical Intrusions
• Permanent physical occupation
• Temporary physical invasion
• *Permanent physical invasion*
• Degree of invasion and just
compensation
U N I V E R S I T Y of H O U S T O N
Professor Marcilynn A. Burke
Copyright©2009 Marcilynn A. Burke
All rights reserved. Provided for student use only.
7