Assembling Land for Urban Redevelopment

Steven J. Eagle

Chapter 2 in Property Rights, 2010, pp 7-26 from Palgrave Macmillan

Abstract: Abstract In Kelo v. City of New London (2005), the U.S. Supreme Court held that the condemnation of unblighted residential neighborhoods for economic development by private entities did not violate the U.S. Constitution’s requirement that condemnation be limited to public use.’ While the text of the 5-4 majority’s opinion stressed deference to past precedent, the subtext was a settled belief that state and local governments would use what the dissent termed “uncabined” powers with fairness and skill. These assumptions arose from a lingering Progressive Era faith in the role of trained professionals as guides to good public policy and from an implicit perception that the institution of property itself had lost much of its coherence (Grey 1980).

Keywords: Urban Renewal; Mobile Home; Eminent Domain; Private Developer; Urban Redevelopment (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2010
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:pal:palchp:978-0-230-10779-3_2

Ordering information: This item can be ordered from
http://www.palgrave.com/9780230107793

DOI: 10.1057/9780230107793_2

Access Statistics for this chapter

More chapters in Palgrave Macmillan Books from Palgrave Macmillan
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().