Kelo v. City of New London

E140035

Kelo v. City of New London is a landmark 2005 U.S. Supreme Court case that expanded the interpretation of “public use” under the Takings Clause to allow government seizure of private property for economic development projects.

All labels observed (2)

How this entity was disambiguated

Statements (49)

Predicate Object
instanceOf United States Supreme Court case ⓘ
eminent domain case ⓘ
landmark decision ⓘ
appliedPrecedent Berman v. Parker ⓘ
Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff ⓘ
aroseInJurisdiction Connecticut ⓘ
clarifiedThat public use includes public purpose ⓘ
concernsClause Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ
concernsConstitutionalProvision Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ
concernsLegalConcept eminent domain ⓘ
just compensation ⓘ
public use ⓘ
criticizedFor allowing transfer of property from less powerful owners to more powerful private interests ⓘ
decisionSplit 5-4 ⓘ
expandedInterpretationOf public use under the Takings Clause ⓘ
hasCitation 545 U.S. 469 ⓘ
hasCountry United States ⓘ
hasCourt Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
hasDecisionDate 2005-06-23 ⓘ
hasDissentingJustices Antonin Scalia ⓘ
Clarence Thomas ⓘ
Sandra Day O’Connor ⓘ
William Rehnquist ⓘ
hasDissentingOpinionBy Justice Clarence Thomas ⓘ
linked to: Clarence Thomas

Justice Sandra Day O’Connor ⓘ
hasDocketNumber No. 04-108 ⓘ
hasMajorityJustices Anthony Kennedy ⓘ
linked to: Anthony M. Kennedy

David Souter ⓘ
linked to: David H. Souter

John Paul Stevens ⓘ
Ruth Bader Ginsburg ⓘ
Stephen Breyer ⓘ
linked to: Stephen G. Breyer
hasMajorityOpinionBy Justice John Paul Stevens ⓘ
linked to: John Paul Stevens
hasPetitioner Susette Kelo ⓘ
hasRespondent City of New London, Connecticut ⓘ
hasYear 2005 ⓘ
heldThat economic development can qualify as a public use under the Takings Clause ⓘ
government may take private property and transfer it to another private party for economic development if part of a comprehensive plan ⓘ
involvesPropertyLocation Fort Trumbull neighborhood, New London, Connecticut ⓘ
involvesTakingOf privately owned homes ⓘ
isTaughtIn U.S. constitutional law courses ⓘ
property law courses ⓘ
purposeOfTaking economic development ⓘ
increased tax revenue ⓘ
job creation ⓘ
relatesToProject New London economic development plan associated with a nearby Pfizer facility ⓘ
resultedIn upholding the City of New London’s use of eminent domain ⓘ
supportsView courts should defer to legislative judgments about public purpose in takings ⓘ
triggeredResponse legislative reforms in many U.S. states limiting eminent domain for economic development ⓘ
widespread public controversy ⓘ

How these facts were elicited

Referenced by (10)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

No. 04-108 → refersToCase → Kelo v. City of New London ⓘ
Susette Kelo → legalCase → Kelo v. City of New London ⓘ
Susette Kelo → legalCaseCitation → Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005) ⓘ
linked to: Kelo v. City of New London
Berman v. Parker → precedentFor → Kelo v. City of New London ⓘ
Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff → relatedCase → Kelo v. City of New London ⓘ