Sorry About Your Home But We Need To Build a Stripmall

Unfortunately for the American people, the US Supreme Court got it wrong today. Deciding 5-4, people's private homes and businesses, even against their will, may be seized for private economic development. The justices stated that local officials best know how to help cities.

The 5-4 ruling represented a defeat for some Connecticut residents whose homes are slated for destruction to make room for an office complex. They argued that cities have no right to take their land except for projects with a clear public use, such as roads or schools, or to revitalize blighted areas.

As a result, cities have wide power to bulldoze residences for projects such as shopping malls and hotel complexes to generate tax revenue.

At issue was the scope of the Fifth Amendment, which allows governments to take private property through eminent domain if the land is for "public use."

Susette Kelo and several other homeowners in a working-class neighborhood in New London, Connecticut, filed suit after city officials announced plans to raze their homes for a riverfront hotel, health club and offices.

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was the voice of reason in this case. She argued that cities should not have unlimited authority to uproot families, even if they are provided compensation, simply to accommodate wealthy developers. Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Rehnquist were in agreement.