Court to look at land seizures

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to consider reining in the power of cities to seize private homes to make way for business development.

Cities and states, armed with constitutional power to take private property for “public use,” traditionally have used it to build roads, schools and airports.

In recent years, many cities began using their land-use authority to condemn older homes to clear the way for shopping malls, hotels, apartments and business complexes. Officials say these private developments bring public benefits, including jobs and more tax revenue.

The justices voted to hear an appeal brought on behalf of several families in a working-class neighborhood of New London, Conn.

The libertarian Institute for Justice, which represents the homeowners, is urging the Supreme Court to call a halt to what it sees as a dangerous trend.

“If jobs and taxes can be a justification for taking someone’s home or business, then no property in America is safe,” said Dana Berliner, a lawyer for the group. “Anyone’s home can create more jobs if it is replaced by a business, and any small business can generate greater taxes if replaced by a bigger one.”

Between 1998 and 2002, there were more than 10,000 instances in 41 states where officials moved to condemn private property so they could transfer it to other private users, the Institute for Justice’s lawyers told the court. Often, these developments have required the uprooting of elderly people who have lived in their homes for decades.

The Constitution says people whose property is taken are entitled to “just compensation.” But the New London homeowners say the government is not entitled to take private property in the first place unless it is needed for a “public use.”

In their response, city officials said New London had been economically depressed since the closing of the Naval Undersea Warfare Center in 1996.

“New London was a city desperate for economic rejuvenation,” they said. When Pfizer Inc., a pharmaceutical company, opened a research center there in 1998, the city announced plans for a 90-acre economic development in the nearby Fort Trumbull section.

Standing in the way were several dozen old homes. Susette Kelo and other owners sued to keep their homes, saying the Constitution protected their rights to their property.

This year, the city won a 4-3 ruling from the Connecticut Supreme Court.

But the U.S. Supreme Court said it would have the last word in Kelo v. City of New London.