Assignment:
In 2005 the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, upheld the constitutionality of a city taking private property, while paying the owner just compensation, and selling it to a private developer as part of a plan to stimulate the city's weak economy (Kelo v. City of New London).
Answer the following questions:
- Explain the rationale of the Supreme Court's decision in Kelo (the majority opinion by Justice Stevens).
- Explain the rationale of Justice O’Connor’s dissenting opinion.
- Evaluate both the majority and minority rationales. Explain and justify your evaluation. Include consideration of these factors:
- The Supreme Court’s traditional approach to the “public use” requirement for takings.
- The relative competence of the Supreme Court vs. local governments to determine what is a “public use” to justify the taking of private property.
Your answer must be at least 250 words in length. Support your claims with examples from the required material(s) and/or other scholarly resources, and properly cite any references.