Synopses & Reviews
On June 23, 2005, the Supreme Court ruled that the city of New London, Connecticut, could condemn fifteen residential properties in the Fort Trumbull area in order to promote and#147;economic developmentand#8221; by transferring them to a new private owner. The use of eminent domain to take private property for public works is generally considered a permissible and#147;public useand#8221; under the Fifth Amendment. In New London, however, the land was condemned to pursue private economic development. When the Supreme Court upheld these takings in
Kelo v. City of New London it empowered the grasping hand of the state and enfeebled the invisible hand of the market.
and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;
In this detailed analysis of one of the most contentious Supreme Court cases in modern times, Ilya Somin argues that Kelo represents a seriousand#151;and dangerousand#151;error. Not only are economic development and closely related blight condemnations unconstitutional under both originalist and most and#147;living constitutionand#8221; theories of legal interpretation, they also tend to victimize the poor and the politically weak, and to destroy more economic value than they create. Kelo exemplifies these patterns: the neighbors who chose to fight their evictions had little political power, while the influential Pfizer corporation played an important role in persuading officials to proceed with the project. In the end, the poorly conceived development plan failed: the condemned land lies empty to this day, occupied only by feral cats. A notably unpopular verdict, Kelo triggered an unprecedented political backlash, with forty-five states passing new laws intended to limit the use of eminent domain. But many of the new state laws turned out to impose few or no genuine constraints on the governmentand#8217;s power to condemn property. The Kelo backlash led to significant progress, but not nearly as much as it would first appear.
and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;
Despite its outcome, the closely divided 5and#150;4 ruling in Kelo shattered what many believed to be a consensus that virtually any condemnation qualifies as a public use under the Fifth Amendment. It also showed that there is widespread opposition to economic development takings. With controversy over this issue sure to continue, The Grasping Hand offers a thorough analysis of the case alongside a broader history of the dispute over the meaning of public use and the use of eminent domain, and an evaluation of options for reform.
Review
"Somin's thorough rebuttal of the constitutional reasoning and philosophical implications of the Supreme Court's Kelo decision demonstrates why that ruling was a constructive disaster: It was so dreadful it has provoked robust defenses of the role of private property in sustaining Americans' liberty."
Review
andldquo;The Grasping Hand is likely to be the definitive analysis of the Supreme Courtandrsquo;s controversial decision in the Kelo case. But Somin attends to much more than that. He sets out the political and doctrinal history that led up to Kelo and critiques the legislative and judicial developments provoked by the reaction to it. Somin has long been a champion of strong property rights. What he has to say will be of value to those who share that commitment and perhaps even more to those who donandrsquo;t.andrdquo;
Review
andldquo;Somin is one of the worldandrsquo;s leading scholars on private property rights, and his analysis of the history of eminent domain and the Kelo decision is extremely thorough and insightful. But The Grasping Hand has something more than just solid legal history and reasoning. With its interviews with property owners and explorations of how eminent domain plays out in the real world, the book, unlike virtually all other scholarly works on eminent domain, compellingly communicates the human dimension and costs of governments teaming up with private interests to take the homes, small businesses, and other property of Americans.andrdquo;
Review
andquot;For anyone interested in the Kelo case, I recommend Sominandrsquo;s book. It is the first book-lengthand#160;discussion of the Kelo appellate proceedings by a legal scholar. It is also by far the most exhaustively researched history of the public use doctrine in the state and federal courts before and since Kelo.and#160;While I do not share Sominand#39;s opposition to the Kelo decision, I welcome his good scholarship on the subject.andrdquo;
Review
andquot;In this carefully researched and convincingly argued volume, Somin provides a powerful critique of the Supreme Courtandrsquo;s and#39;public useand#39; jurisprudence and the controversial Kelo decision. He also gives careful attention to the hostile public reaction to the ruling and points out that much of the post-Kelo reform legislation is inadequate to prevent future eminent domain abuse. This insightful book belongs on the shelf of anyone interested in the place of property rights in constitutional law.andquot;
Review
andquot;By dint of his uncommon thoroughness, Somin has become the leading and most persuasive critic of the Supreme Courtandrsquo;s ill-fated Kelo decision. His close examination of the caseandrsquo;s factual backdrop offers chilling confirmation of his central thesis: weak constitutional protection of property rights opens the door to political intrigue that exacts its greatest toll on the poor and vulnerable in society. Sominandrsquo;s gripping account confirms your worst fears about big government.andquot;
Review
andquot;[A] key contribution to the literature on property rights. I dare say that this is the most important book on eminent domain since Epsteinandrsquo;s classic, Takings. . . . [Sominand#39;s] voice is the voice of reason, precisely the kind of scholarship that is sorely needed in our polarized society. And this book is, today, the leading authority on Kelo.andquot;
Review
andldquo;Sharp legal, economic, and historical analysis of the eminent domain debate. . . . The Grasping Hand tells the story of the battle in fascinating detail. Somin succinctly recounts the facts that many readers will remember but adds a great deal of additional detail to show many ugly but unknown truths about it.andquot;
Review
andldquo;Somin provides a fine tour of the case and of the intellectual history of eminent-domain law. More important, he provides a framework for thinking about the future of eminent domain and private property. . . . Somin has written an important book that maps the road ahead for those who believe that individual freedom cannot be separated from the protection of private property.andrdquo;
Review
andldquo;Somin has written what is likely to be the definitive legal analysis of Kelo, its aftermath, and its future prospects. . . . The Grasping Hand is excellent at laying out the political and doctrinal developments that led up to Kelo and at canvassing the backlash and legislative response to it.andrdquo;
Synopsis
Suzette Kelo was just trying to rebuild her life when she purchased a broken-down Victorian house perched on the waterfront in New London, CT. The house wasn't particularly fancy, but with lots of hard work Suzette was able to turn it into a home that was important to her, a home that represented her new found independence.
Little did she know that the City of New London, desperate to revive its flailing economy, wanted to raze her house and the others like it that sat along the waterfront in order to win a lucrative Pfizer pharmaceutical contract that would bring new business into the city. Kelo and fourteen neighbors flat out refused to sell, so the city decided to exercise its power of eminent domain to condemn their homes, launching one of the most extraordinary legal cases of our time, a case that ultimately reached the United States Supreme Court.
In Little Pink House, award-winning investigative journalist Jeff Benedict takes us behind the scenes of this case -- indeed, Suzette Kelo speaks for the first time about all the details of this inspirational true story as one woman led the charge to take on corporate America to save her home.
Synopsis
SOON TO BE A MOTION PICTURE STARRING CATHERINE KEENER THAT "BRINGS URGENCY TO A FASCINATING, UNDER-EXPLORED THEME." - THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER
Suzette Kelo was just trying to rebuild her life when she purchased a falling down Victorian house perched on the waterfront in New London, CT. The house wasn't particularly fancy, but with lots of hard work Suzette was able to turn it into a home that was important to her, a home that represented her new found independence.
Little did she know that the City of New London, desperate to revive its flailing economy, wanted to raze her house and the others like it that sat along the waterfront in order to win a lucrative Pfizer pharmaceutical contract that would bring new business into the city. Kelo and fourteen neighbors flat out refused to sell, so the city decided to exercise its power of eminent domain to condemn their homes, launching one of the most extraordinary legal cases of our time, a case that ultimately reached the United States Supreme Court.
In Little Pink House, award-winning investigative journalist Jeff Benedict takes us behind the scenes of this case -- indeed, Suzette Kelo speaks for the first time about all the details of this inspirational true story as one woman led the charge to take on corporate America to save her home.
"Passionate...a page-turner with conscience." -- Publishers Weekly
"Catherine Keener nails the combination of anger, grace, and attitude that made Susette Kelo a nationally known crusader." -- Deadline Hollywood
Synopsis
When Suzette Kelo refused to sell her home to make way for a pharmaceutical plant, her city decided to exercise its power of eminent domain and launched one of the most extraordinary legal cases of modern times. An award-winning investigative journalist details how one woman led the charge to take on corporate America.
Synopsis
In 2005, the Supreme Court ruled that the city of New London, Connecticut, could condemn fifteen residential properties in order to transfer them to a new private owner. Although the Fifth Amendment only permits the taking of private property for andldquo;public use,andrdquo; the Court ruled that the transfer of condemned land to private parties for andldquo;economic developmentandrdquo; is permitted by the Constitutionandmdash;even if the government cannot prove that the expected development will ever actually happen. The Courtandrsquo;s decision in
Kelo v. City of New London empowered the grasping hand of the state at the expense of the invisible hand of the market.
and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160; and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;and#160;
In this detailed study of one of the most controversial Supreme Court cases in modern times, Ilya Somin argues that Kelo was a grave error. Economic development and andldquo;blightandrdquo; condemnations are unconstitutional under both originalist and most andldquo;living constitutionandrdquo; theories of legal interpretation. They also victimize the poor and the politically weak for the benefit of powerful interest groups and often destroy more economic value than they create. Kelo itself exemplifies these patterns. The residents targeted for condemnation lacked the influence needed to combat the formidable government and corporate interests arrayed against them.and#160; Moreover, the cityandrsquo;s poorly conceived development plan ultimately failed: the condemned land lies empty to this day, occupied only by feral cats. The Supreme Courtandrsquo;s unpopular ruling triggered an unprecedented political reaction, with forty-five states passing new laws intended to limit the use of eminent domain. But many of the new laws impose few or no genuine constraints on takings. The Kelo backlash led to significant progress, but not nearly as much as it may have seemed.
Despite its outcome, the closely divided 5-4 ruling shattered what many believed to be a consensus that virtually any condemnation qualifies as a public use under the Fifth Amendment. It also showed that there is widespread public opposition to eminent domain abuse. With controversy over takings sure to continue, The Grasping Hand offers the first book-length analysis of Kelo by a legal scholar, alongside a broader history of the dispute over public use and eminent domain and an evaluation of options for reform.
and#160;
Synopsis
Ilya Sominand#8217;s The Grasping Hand: Kelo v. New London and the Limits of Eminent Domain is the definitive review of one of the most controversial Supreme Court cases of the 21st century.and#160; Somin provides a thorough analysis of the caseand#8217;s historic and factual background along with the broader history of American public-purpose takings and the challenges posed by economic-development takings.and#160; The book offers a detailed account of the trajectory of the Kelo case itself, from the neighbors electing to fight their eviction through finding legal representation via a collection of strange-bedfellow public-interest groups.and#160; The litigatorsand#8217; strategies are examined and Somin brings us into the Supreme Court to scrutinize the thrust and parry of oral argument.and#160; Sominand#8217;s close reading and incisive critique of the Kelo opinion is the heart of the book.and#160; Holding that the Court made several serious doctrinal errors, Somin carefully parses the majority opinion, concurrences, and dissents to show where the Justices went wrong, and even offers some responsible speculation about why.and#160; A notably unpopular verdict, Kelo sparked significant political backlash.and#160; Somin takes a qualitative and quantitative tour through the large number of new state laws passed in the wake of Kelo, studying the mechanisms by which they were passed, their effectiveness, and public awareness of these new laws.and#160; The work concludes with recommendations toward reform, or prohibition, of takings justified on the premise of blight or hoped-for private economic development.
About the Author
and#160;Ilya Somin is professor of law at the George Mason University School of Law and an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute. He is the author of Democracy and Political Ignorance: Why Smaller Government is Smarter. Sominandrsquo;s work has appeared in numerous academic and popular publications, including the Yale Law Journal, Los Angeles Times, and USA Today. He writes regularly for the popular Volokh Conspiracy blog, affiliated with the Washington Post.