Can the Government Force You Out of Your House? | Kelo v. New London
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 22 ส.ค. 2019
- I wrote a new book all about the Supreme Court. Order your copy here: amzn.to/45Wzhur or visit www.iammrbeat.com/merch.html.
Want to learn more about this case? Click here to buy Jeff Benedict's "Little Pink House:" www.amazon.com/shop/mr.beat
City Beautiful's video about eminent domain: • How Eminent Domain Des...
Subscribe to@CityBeautiful
In episode 48 of Supreme Court Briefs, a woman gets kicked out of her home. She fights back. #supremecourtbriefs #eminentdomain #law
Patreon: / iammrbeat
Donate on Paypal: www.paypal.me/mrbeat
Buy Mr. Beat T-shirts, coffee mugs, etc.: www.iammrbeat.com/merch.html
Reddit: / mrbeat
Mr. Beat's band: electricneedleroom.us
Mr. Beat on Twitter: / beatmastermatt
Mr. Beat on Facebook: / iammrbeat
Mr. Beat on Instagram: / iammrbeat
Mr. Beat's Discord server: / discord
Produced by Matt Beat. All images by Matt Beat, found in the public domain, or used under fair use guidelines. Music by Electric Needle Room (Mr. Beat's band).
Check out cool primary sources here:
www.oyez.org/cases/2004/04-108
Other sources used:
www.wnpr.org/post/little-pink...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v....
www.courant.com/ctnow/movies/...
historicbuildingsct.com/the-ke...
www.ncsl.org/research/environm...
www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2...
Little Pink House: A True Story of Defiance and Courage by Jeff Benedict
ij.org/case/kelo/
www.nytimes.com/2009/11/13/ny...
newengland.com/today/living/a...
castlecoalition.org/?option=co...
Creative commons photo credits:
Nard
Pi.1415926535
Beyond My Ken
John Phelan
Jackie
Phil Roeder
Fibonacci Blue
New London, Connecticut
1997
Susette (Suzette) Kelo drives by a run down house along the Thames (Tames) River that has been for sale for awhile. Even though the house is run down, she falls in love with it and buys it. She spends months completely renovating the 107-year old Victorian-style cottage, painting it pink. The house had a great view of the water, and was in a working-class neighborhood called Fort Trumbull. Unfortunately, the neighborhood had been in decline for years, as there were few decent paying jobs nearby. But Susette didn’t care. She loved her little pink house and its view of the harbor. She soon met a dude named Tim LeBlanc, who helped her do exterior work on the house. Eventually the two would get married and live there together.
But then, in January 1998, real estate agents began knocking on her door, offering lots of money to buy her house on behalf of “an unnamed buyer.” Kelo was suspicious, and turned down all offers. However, agents began to tell her if she didn’t sell her house, she would be forced out of her home by the city due to something called “eminent domain.” Eminent domain, you say? What the heck is that?
Eminent domain is the right for a government to just take private property for public use. In other words, if the government thinks it is in the best interest of all its citizens, it can kick you out of your house. Both the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment and the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution say the government can use eminent domain, but it just requires “just compensation.”
Susette Kelo didn’t care how much money New London was offering her. She loved her little pink house, and wasn’t going anywhere. Neither were 14 other Fort Trumbull residents. They decided to fight. Wait a second, why was New London trying to kick them out?
Well Pfizer, a multinational pharmaceutical corporation, was opening a new facility in New London, right next to the Fort Trumbull neighborhood. Part of the deal were plans to “fix up” Fort Trumbull, including building a new hotel, conference center, and fancy housing for the scientists working at Pfizer. This would require major government help. $73 million in help. Yep, the state of Connecticut would pitch in $73 million to kick out the Fort Trumbull residents, demolish their homes, and update the area with new roads and utilities.
Once Kelo and the other Fort Trumbull residents who didn’t want to leave their homes found out about this, they sued the city. Meanwhile, an organization called the New London Development Corporation, or NLDC, was already demolishing homes. By the time of the trial, which went to the New London Superior Court in July 2001, the NLDC already had acquired around 80 buildings and destroyed most of them.
My book about everything you need to know about the Supreme Court is now available!
Amazon: amzn.to/3Jj3ZnS
Bookshop (a collection of indie publishers): bookshop.org/books/the-power-of-and-frustration-with-our-supreme-court-100-supreme-court-cases-you-should-know-about-with-mr-beat/9781684810680
Barnes and Noble: www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-matt-beat/1142323504?ean=9781684810680
Amazon UK: www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=the+power+of+our+supreme+court&crid=3R59T7TQ6WKI3&sprefix=the+power+of+our+supreme+courth%2Caps%2C381&ref=nb_sb_noss
Mango: mango.bz/books/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-by-matt-beat-2523-b
Target: www.target.com/p/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-by-matt-beat-paperback/-/A-86273023
Walmart: www.walmart.com/ip/The-Power-of-Our-Supreme-Court-How-the-Supreme-Court-Cases-Shape-Democracy-Paperback-9781684810680/688487495
Chapters Indigo: www.chapters.indigo.ca/en-ca/books/the-power-of-our-supreme/9781684810680-item.html?ikwid=The+Power+of+Our+Supreme+Court&ikwsec=Home&ikwidx=0#algoliaQueryId=eab3e89ad34051a62471614d72966b7e
I understand the need eminent domain for public use, building public schools or public hospitals...but for eminent domain to be used as past to what amounts to a subsidy for a private business, that's corruption.
@ you are talking cold hard finamnce, ignoring the human element.
my township is building a kindergarten in my street, in an empty lot owned by the developer that built my house. that's a good use of the eminent domain. public utilities that what it should be used for.
but Americans don't believe in the public good, that's why you are the only country not to have universal healthcare, and why you kick people off their home for profit.
@ we are only following the U.S example.
everything bad isreal does it leaned from the U.S, be it racist laws and policies, war crimes, the annexation of land from other countries and ethnic cleansing, you all did it first, we are taking our ques from you guys.
@@gadyariv2456
I've never heard of the US government murdering the inhabitants of a house, before flattening it and allowing extremist religious nutjobs to build on it instead?
Neither have I ever heard of the US being terrorised by grope-gangs who roam the street in their black hats, attacking any women and even young girls for being too slutty, while crying that they've a victim whenever police, soldiers or concerned citizens confront them.
Can you show me where in the US the streets are dominated by ultra-orthodox grope-gangs and rape-gangs?
@ does the phrase Indian removal
rings a bell? ever heard about the trail of tears?
what about Mexican Repatriation in the 1930s after you annexed north Mexico in the 1840's.
your county's prosperity and superpower status are founded in doing the same things isreal does today.
you can say it's in the past, but the descendants of the enslaved and the dispossessed of still suffer from the reproductions of this history and are still marginalized, so it's not in the past.
If you were German I'd tell you that your country did a horrible thing in the past, but you paid your dues and earned not to be judged by your past.
unlike the Germans. The U.S never paid a dime in reparations to all the countless people it hurt, U.S awful record is very much relevant today. it's quite hypocritical for you as an American to criticize isreal for doing what you did, without at least recognizing that we are following your example.
I'm very much in favor of Americans criticizing Israel, (I think what we are doing is horrible and we must be stopped), just not in a hypocritical holier than thou way, because you aren't better than us.
Like I always say. Republicans hate big government. Democrats hate big corporations. Everyone else knows they are the basically the same thing.
Wow, a woman who took on corporate companies, and lost the battle but not the war. Amazing how people can take on corporate companies and win. But the way, Mr. Beat, your channel does not suck.
Thanks buddy. And yeah, she has been a fighter. She still makes appearances about the injustices of these kinds of eminent domain.
And it was right wingers that championed her cause. Gotta love how things work.
@@rangergxi Well it was both sides, but yeah mostly right-wing media
She did lose the war. She lost her house and we lost a chuck of the Constitution. How is that winning sir?
@@rangergxi "Right-Wingers" have this notion that the Constitution is the highest of all law and that words mean what they say and say what they mean --- Or at least they did before you people came along.
I've got to side with the dissent on this one. Kicking people out of their houses to make accommodation for a private company's staff does not fit my definition of "public use". Then low and behold the company abandons the project! Not right.
What is right are city beautiful and Mr beat working together. Very right indeed.
I wasn't sure if you already watched his channel. I'm glad you do! And yeah, I agree with you about the case.
Right. Given the right time and place, I understand eminent domain. This was not the case. Any private corporation benefiting by anything but proxy is not for the public good, in my mind. Corporations only care about making money. No matter who is hurt.
This was straight up Bizarro Zone Robin Hood and the Justices clearly made the wrong decision as a whole.
What happened to the money that the state gave the private company?
I agree. There needs to be some stipulation that if they don’t follow through on their end, pay us back.
I thought it was ironic that after the case, a consortium, in protest of the decision, decided to ask a New Hampshire county to seize the home of justice David Souter for development of a strip mall.
Yeah I heard about that!
😂😂😂
Thanks for the collab! I hope these videos are put to public use and we receive our just compensation. :)
lol we are killing it today. I mean...demolishing it :/
City Beautiful you have a great channel. I love your video about the freeway that almost ran through SF, the big city I live 35 miles east of.
Just what happened made me said
Eminent domain should be very limited with huge studies to show how the public would benefit. The Supreme court has made a lot of missteps during its hisory. Glad cities and states did something to correct this one.
Well put
Yup, it should only be used in times of emergency (war or natural disaster).
@@mirzaahmed6589 That's way too strict. If it weren't for eminent domain, projects like new freeways, most notably the Interstate Highway System, and any expansion of rail public transportation in the cities and their suburbs would be impossible. Those aren't emergencies or due to natural disasters, but they are nevertheless necessary for the public good and advancement of modern society.
Naturally, this specific case crosses the line, but necessary and effective use of eminent domain is more common than you might think.
@@Compucleswe do not need more useless roads. we need cities and towns that are liveable without a car. demolishing ANY private property to build a freeway is a gigantic WASTE. if they were to demolish anything, at least build a rail system. 1000000x more effecient and an actual PUBLIC good, one that almost everyone can use! not everyone has a car or can drive one. the majority of disabled folks cant, for one, and too many poor people are left with a shitty public transport system that is nigh unusable in most states. no safe, usuable bike lanes, 3-4 crappy busses for an entire city, and barely any rails for public transport for the majority of the US. fk eminent domain and free ways
@@davechongle That's impossible in a country the size of the United States. You simply can't handle modern transportation throughout the whole country with a rail system in the same way you can with a freeway system. We did use to have one, but once cars came around and showed just how much more convenient and fewer limits they had compared to trains, the rail system was naturally for the most part eventually replaced with roads. Most people don't want to rely on a train schedule and the limited places they can stop when they can also drive directly to their location on their own schedules.
Even inside cities themselves, networks of major roads, especially to and through the suburbs are required to make a city function. While some American cities could use better public transportation systems, they just aren't designed to use it so heavily in the same way that Japanese cities are.
Besides, your entire rant is built on a faulty premise. How are we supposed to build this transcontinental rail system and expand public transportation in the cities without using eminent domain?! Whatever transportation method you design, eminent domain is required in some way for the infrastructure. Beyond that, there are other needed uses for imminent domain aside from transportation.
I was like "what a coincidence that two unrelated channels choose the same topic at the same time!"
Yeah, I would've thought it was a collab but like a week ago Vox and City Beautiful actually did post similar vids at the same time.
Well I'm just happy you're already following us both. :D
@@zachzaslavsky4282 Yeah the Vox thing was indeed a coincidence.
@@iammrbeat my pleasure, really
Oh no rural place in Europe
It was utterly ridiculous. I still walk by there. It has had little to no development at all, just vacant lots.
And that backlash was no joke. That wasn't the last time eminent domain cropped up in CT. The difference now though is that people still remember what happened here.
Currently the space that Pfizer used to have is now taken up by General Dynamics/Electric Boat, a submarine manufacturing company that regularly contracts with the government. They have been in business for years. No hotels have propped up, no extra housing, nothing. The demand that the City claimed would arise from Pfizer didn't surface then and it hasn't surfaced now.
The homes there were shitty by all accounts, but they were still homes to a lot of people.
And it all amounted to nothing. Disgraceful.
Thanks for sharing that
I'm originally from Omaha, Nebraska. There was a Historic Building district called Jobber's Canyon that was torn down to accommodate the ConAgra Headquarters. Fast Forward 20 years and ConAgra abandons it's headquarters for Chicago ironically moving into a Historic Building in Chicago. Omaha was left with an area that was abandoned and with what was left of the Jobber's Canyon half of what historical area there is. Sometimes "economic development" works for the short term, but long term gains never materialize.
@@bfun4615 And that's why subsidizing and allowing private company to own and abuse our land and laws should be frown
Easily one of the worst decisions of modern times
They literally ignored the Constitution in this case. When is "for public use" actually relevant then?
@@MrVedude You're 100% right. They completely ripped apart the Takings Clause and basically made it a dead letter.
Yeah. I mean, I try not to bring my bias in here, but....yeah.
100% agreed, this decision brings eminent domain only one step away from Chinese level property confiscation
@@iammrbeat It's one of those rare cases that are hated on both sides of the aisle. The Left because it's corporate oppression on the common man, from the right because it's government overreach.
The supreme court briefs are the best thing on this channel, I've watched every single one.
Well that's really good to know! I'm glad you like them. :) I'll try to release more this fall.
@@iammrbeat I have even shared a few on Reddit, when I had had the opportunity.
Well heck if you share this one let me know so I can upvote my own video. lol
@@iammrbeat Unfortunately it gets flagged as "political" on /r/videos and I can't post to politicalvideos, as I once shared a foxnews video and was banned in the process.
Welp, just tried myself. Yeah, autoflagged it down; was hoping my title would be enough to get it through.
This isn't political at all 9.9
Gonna post it to the other sub though as I haven't yet been blocked there.
they is a 1997 Australia film called "the Castle". is about a working-class family who lives next to Melbourne airport. When the airport wants to put in a mail centre and plan to knot down the family home to it. The family go through the count to keed the home and the poolroom.
I had no idea about this film. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
Eminent domain should only be used for things like, roads, railways, pipelines, transmission lines, dams, schools, and parks. Private development is definitely not right.
This happened to me when I was in the third grade. The city council wanted to replace 5 downtown houses with a parking lot. The houses were in perfect condition. I lived in one of those houses. There was an empty field a block away, but the city council wanted the parking lot in a very specific location. The people on my block collected signatures to try to save the houses. The people next door to us were an older couple with a little white dog. I don’t know what happened to them. Our house had a semicircular breakfast nook and a big backyard. I still miss the house.
The house was just right for us because since it was downtown, my mother could walk to stores. My mother didn’t drive. My father then bought a house that we really couldn’t afford.
this breaks my heart :( you can't just force people out of their HOMES
Replacing housing with a parking lot is dumb af. Shoud be the other way around.
Well said it's like stealing from the poor and giving it to the rich.
it wan't controversial, it was universally condemned
Nah, the 1% is part of the universe
Eminent Domain is actually scarily common in Connecticut. 3 homes in my town have been destroyed by the government just to build a senior center that'll likely never be built
Senior centre that takes serves the community and take in old people is an awesome public use
Eminent Domain: Great idea, horribly open for abuse.
It's not even a great idea.
"Great idea" is debatable.
You need a rode expanded due to traffic choking a city some people won't give you the 2ft of lawn you would need to expand it on either side causing everyone to suffer in congested traffic because someone didn't want slightly less lawn.
In 2006, I voted in favor of my State limiting use of eminent domain to explicitly public uses. It felt pretty good then, and still does!!
There were some even worse cases. I remember two towns, one in NJ and one in Missouri, declared eminent domain on perfectly nice middle class neighborhoods so that developers could build mansions, thereby increasing taxes for the cities.
I've been directly involved in eminent domain abuse by the government as a resident of Atlantic City. It's hard to fathom supporters of this kind of government overreach. It violates the sanctity of private property which was key in the development of this Country, usually victimizes the 'little guy' in favor of large corporations, and often fails to deliver on the promises it makes.
I'm so sorry you went through that. :(
@@iammrbeat Thanks. We actually won and still have the house. But, it wasn't easy and many others weren't so lucky.
Connecticuter here, but “Come in and don’t make progress” is actually our state motto so I wasn’t surprised by the results
Holy Duck, they broke down an entire neighborhood and kicked out the inhabitants to redevelop, but they never redeveloped? Jezus Christmas 🎄, what the hell man! This is pure injustice.
I KNEW IT WASN'T A COINCIDENCE!!!
It was our little conspiracy. mwhahahahaha
This is a fascinating case. It's interesting how the more liberal judges backed a plan to use the clause to benefit a private corporation. Generally progressive or left leaning politicians tout their belief in the right of the individual over the corporation. Thank you for the video!
Most definitely. Thanks for watching!
Goes to show how greed knows no political affiliation.
Progressive/left-leaning politicians are all about the state as mommy and daddy, with the corollary being that mommy and daddy get to tell you what you are allowed to do, so this isn't at all surprising.
So many movies have been made about a rickety tiny house fighting against development, banks, the city, and such, all with similar story plots and all showing the house standing among mismatched surroundings from them not being able to demolish it.
It should be a trope at this point.
Stephen King even wrote a book about it, Road Work.
Eminent Domain has good usages as well as bad. It can save lives and entire cities. Land isn't taken it's purchased at a fair price. I've had family members contest what that price is when easements were procured but they were paid. That said it seems that a good portion of our nation wants to side with wealthy and powerful corporate powers over individuals. Remember not only is there legal there is also political and public relations recourse. I lived in a medium size city where one small dairy farm prevented an industrial park from going inside the city as the farmer got lots of press coverage and had a good emotional story. The park was located outside of the city and thousands of dollars of tax revenues were lost. At the same time the hospital wanted to expand and had over the years purchased all of the homes in an adjacent neighborhood. Only one person held out delaying the building of the surgery center for an additional 10 years, when the owner eventually passed away. Was the delay worth it? How many people had to go to another town to have surgery and maybe dying because of that? Tough to say? Even as a leaning left liberal, I would generally defend the idea of Eminent Domain.
Well put
When I saw both pop up at the same time I figured you and City Beautiful had a collaboration! Hooray! As someone who focused specifically on urban history he's another big favorite
I never miss a video by him. One of my favorite classes in college was Urban Geography. I even thought about being an urban planner for awhile.
Thanks Patrick!
If the city had written in a clause saying that Pfizer couldn't shut down the plant for at least 20 years or so or get fined then I would agree with the ruling...but they didn't.
There is also the belated win for those against eminent domain use in the aftermath of Kelo as well. The Michigan Supreme Court overturned its Poltown decision with County of Wayne v. Hathcock in the aftermath of Kelo. Previously in 1981, the Michigan Supreme Court had allowed Pontiac to plow over a part of Poltown in Detroit to build a Cadillac factory. Hopefully the next time this comes up we will have something that puts hard limits on eminent domain again on the federal level.
Does the Court make any sense in this case?
Also, be sure to check out City Beautiful's video about eminent domain: th-cam.com/video/w0cCF2pG13U/w-d-xo.html
Also
Did you spot the cowlick?
The Court is making less and less sense as time moves on. Thank you repubs. Yang 2020 ( our last chance for Democracy ) 👍
No this is one of their worst decisions right up there with Plessy vs Ferguson, US vs Miller, and Dread Scott
In the US, one of the most uses of eminent domain for a private company was in securing right of ways for railroad construction.
Thank you mister beat, very cool!
Soooo this decision sucks from what I can gather.
Rip John Paul Stevens April 20 1920-July 16 2019
Yep, he had a great run and had such a big impact on this country.
Can you imagine a Republican president nominating a jurist like him now. The USA has changed a lot since Gerald Ford.
tellthemborissentyou I miss moderate justices
Don't want to speak ill of the dead, but he sure didn't stick up for the little guy on this one.
@Dan Groom He was a Rockefeller Republican, a moderate/liberal. Look at cases like Sony vs Universal and you’ll see he sided with the people. I think you’re also conflating “leftist” and “liberal”, there is no leftwing Supreme Court.
I was already a subscriber of both City Beautiful and Mr. Beat. Wonderful to see you two working together!
I agree with the dissenting opinion. Eminent Domain should only be applied when it helps the PUBLIC. The government taking a private individuals property and then GIVING that property to ANOTHER private individual OR corporation is just ridiculous. That is favoring one privatized individual/cooperation over another.
Thank you for all the information and you have taught well about the case!!
I got so excited when I saw a new Supreme Court Briefs! Woop woop!!!!! The state of Connecticut should be embarrassed! I mean, they should already be embarrassed for a multitude of other reasons but this just adds to it!
Yeah, I agree. It's hard to be sympathetic to New London in this case. And I guess I'll have to make more of these. :D
I'm watching this from New London, CT just back from a walk at Fort Trumbull. Nice summary of our misadventure in eminent domain. On a side note, another neighborhood was taken by the city and NLDC during this same time period. It was just up the river next to the state pier facility. No one fought back in that neighborhood so it went largely unnoticed. The property was given to the state to expand the state pier footprint. It was supposed to be for economic development like the Fort Trumbull so the state getting it is in violation of the agreement. But neither scenario proved to be a benefit to the city. There are some recent articles about the state pier neighborhood taking at TheDay.com. If one goes to Google Maps and looks at the satellite view, the streets haven't been removed (8th St., 10th St., 12th St., 16th St., and Fraser St.) but instead of homes, there are now huge salt piles and paved storage area.
New London is not as good as old London.
I've never been to either so...no comment. :)
Its better
Liam Walsh meh, they both have a Thames river
@@TheLiamster I ment London is better I also live there
PureAsGold really i thought judging by your profile picture you would be American.
please keep cross promoting.. i watch both your channels a lot and this makes it soooooo much easier. great video btw.
Thanks so much and yeah, we have already talked about another cross promotion.
As a resident of Norwich CT with a mother from New London, the way you pronounced Thames River was slightly amusing.
love your work mr beat. suggestion: flynt Vs falwell
Christopher Hitchens on very Fartwell...
Hustler v. Falwell has been on my list of cases to cover for a long time :D
Hello Mr Beat! Your channel is nothing short of magnificent! 🥂
I was in high school when all this came out. My girlfriend (who was just as political as I was at the time) said we'd all better get used to averting our eyes and saying "Yes m'lord" again.
Great video! Thank you Mr beat!
Thank you! :D
What I don’t personally like about eminent domain is that the government says that they will use it for the benefit of the public, and most of the time they do, but in this specific case it’s on the backs of corporations
Is it impossible to have a city/town called London without a river Thames!?
There is London, England (obviously). Then there is London, Ontario, which also has a Thames. Now I learn of New London, Connecticut that also has a Thames!
This is getting out of hand
It sounds like there should be a whole video dedicated to the topic!
@@iammrbeat please!!
Thanks for doing this video on my home town! I appreciate it!
no one cares
The courts do not have any authority to change or rewrite the U.S. Constitution..
The Constitution gives specific examples of what eminent domain can be used for - not private use.
Your videos are always great Mr. Beat. You are awesome
That's kind of you to say. Glad you dig them! :D
As progressive as I am, I'm actually pretty upset that Ruth Bader Ginsberg made this decision and Scalia went the against New London. Pretty ironic considering how liberals and conservatives in my home state of Wisconsin feel about the current eminent domain problem with Foxconn.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a pro government liberal with some 4th amendment leanings, what did you expect? She wanted you to be able to kill babies not keep your house
In the UK if the government uses Eminent Domain (called "Compulsory Purchase" here) and then later finds they don't need they don't need the land for that purpose they should return the land to the original owner at market value. This is called "Chrichel Down" rules, coming from a political controversy during/after World War 2. The handling of that affair also serves as the precedent for individual government ministers resigning for policy failures.
Thanks for this...I consider myself well versed in UK politics but was unaware of this event. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crichel_Down_affair
Check out Overton Park v. Volpe. This stopped the construction of interstate 40 through Memphis and Memphis became know as the one Place I-40 stopped. All this after homes were destroyed.
Great video!
**LOVE** that you cross promo'd with City Beautiful; especially ****LOVE**** that you did it in a Supreme Court Brief so as to promote this beatiful series of yours!
Love that you like the series and his channel!!
I’m wondering if the “Takings Clause” of the Fifth Amendment actually was intended to protect property other than houses as most modern eminent domain cases often are about. When the Amendment was written, many Americans were still owed money due to them from the Continental Congress during the revolutionary war for property and possessions taken from them that were used by the Army. Horses, food, weapons etc. were the majority of confiscated property. It seems that this is more of what the clause relates to and it has somehow been twisted over the centuries to mean “the government can take your house”.
They violated her Third Amendment, Fifth Amendment, and Fourteenth Amendment!
The time before everyone know who Pfizer were
Everyone has known Pfizer for decades. They were a multibillion dollar pharma company long before Covid.
They used to be known for creating erections before this case of knocking them down.
Eminent Domain should not be used for private business. Ever. Absolutely not.
I was a kid when this started so I missed a lot of it snd didn’t understand the severity, but I read the book a few years ago and was shocked. I lived a few blocks from the location and it still sits vacant and a mess. Pfizer has ruined that area. There’s a huge daycare they built for staff that also sits empty. The daycare is on a public street and could easily be used to help provide childcare to the people of new London but nope….they let it rot.
That's sad 😔
Wow this is surprising, I can’t believe they did that just to not use it, excellent video mr beat!
This is very well made.
I love your channel’
I'll tell you what's "just compensation." Moving my house and belongings somewhere else instead of tearing it down, or building a replica!
I think the invocation of Eminent Domain is acceptable under the most extraordinary of circumstances... like WW3 type circumstances. I can't think of a more egregious mishandling of a case in SCOTUS history than Kelo. Just beyond the pale... every Justice in favor of New London should hang their heads in shame. Just disgusting.
And my two most disliked justices sided with Kelo. Mainly Scalia and Thomas
We at least need a good solid definition of "just compensation".
That's what happened to a neighborhood not far from me. Now, they're two new hospitals on it.
I can look out the window and see that house.
in Croydon England there is a skyscraper in the middle of a roundabout. the owner of the original house turned office, a lawyer argued that the town did not need the property, they could build round it.
I would use eminent domain to seize the land under the rail tracks and re-develop railroads in the US.
Our infrastructure is indeed falling apart.
Ironically, railroads do have eminent domain power. The process probably hasn't been used in over a century, but it still exists today.
Thanks again, Mr. Beat, for the "heads up" about the City Beautiful channel. Will subscribe there. I think I've subscribed to maybe 10 channels all because you featured them on your channel. Keep up the cross-promotions with other channels. Thank you again, Mr. Beat!
That's awesome. Thanks for checking all of those out and trusting my recommendation!
All that effort for the demolition of an entire neighborhood, only for economists to panic and cause funding for the project to dry up. No wonder it's one that unites the left and right. What's valuable to an individual or a family, is a potential obstacle for development to a business. Kind of reminds me of the back and forth rhetoric over the saga of the potential expansion of London's Heathrow Airport.
The airport has for years wanted to build a third runway and build yet more terminals. However, because of it being surrounded on all sides by people's homes and major infrastructure, like the M25 motorway, the airport can't expand without upsetting somebody. The current plans would call for the destruction of an entire village, Harmondsworth, to build the new third runway. There's a sharp split between those who are concerned about the impact of the increased number of flights affecting the local community (even now a plane takes off or lands at Heathrow every 90 seconds) with regards to noise and also the fact that if it was built, the airport would be the single biggest polluter in the entire United Kingdom, and those who want Heathrow to remain a hub airport used as much for people changing from one flight to another as for starting and finishing journeys there
The British old fashioned industry pollutes most though. More than half the entire air pollution in the Netherlands is blown over from the London Met area and its massive amount of industries and cars.
By the way, Schiphol Airport lands and takes off every 30 seconds.
Blah b
That's only because Schipol has 6 runways rather than two.
Oh boy, that sounds dramatic. Yeah the people who come in and just assume folks can be bribed out of their neighborhoods baffle me sometimes.
My opinion on eminent domain depends on what happens to the seized property down the road. Only the real, future ends can justify the means, not some proposed improvement. Therefore, since no one can predict the future, it’s a no-go, just as the Kelo decision shows.
Don't forget to watch Frank Capra's 1938 Academy Award for Best Picture masterpiece "You Can't Take it With You". Hit's the nail on the head.
I haven't seen it, and here I'm a Capra fan. Thanks for bringing it up. :D
Was an eminent Domain survivor. Its a cruel law for families to be displaced.
The 1938 Oscar Winner "You Can't Take it With You", not only a great American classic, but my personal favourite movie of all time, depicts this scenario, and then some. The performances, script, direction, photography are all "outta the park" great.
It's beautiful, please watch it.
I remember this case! Ironically I now live in the next city over. New London is still super run down
What is a history teacher's favorite vegetable? ...A beat...😂😂😂. Awesome video Mr. Beat. If I was a Justice I would side with Reihnquist, Scalia, Thomas, and O'Connor.
This is one case I would not be sad to see the current court overturn
I had no idea the end result of Melo was Pfizer leaving the project that started the whole thing. Good content. Subbed.
Little pink houses for you and me --John Mellencamp. 🙂🎵
Such a great song.
This is completely insane. We really do live in a corporatocracy
Standard vote split, all the ideological judges who favour bigger government voted for the measure for bigger government, all the more limited government, constitutionally minded judges voted against. Just another highlight that the courts don't care too much about the "law" and are just another political/ideological venue.
It definitely was an ideologically-based decision, unfortunately.
Give it up for the 4 Republicans who dissented! Gotta love those small government conservative ideals.
Cases like this remind me of why I actually have a lot of love for Scalia, and very little for Bader-Ginsberg
Joe Bubenz a broken clock is right twice a day... Scalia was perhaps bound to occasionally make a correct ruling, but it was rare.
@@jpe1 Lol you’re calling Scalia the broken clock? He stayed consistent with pro individual and pro business rulings, RBG just did whatever she wanted because no one could judge her without being crucified, god bless her soul and god bless Scalia
@@marcoalejandro1407 yes, Scalia’s consistent. Consistently thinking in the short term for what benefits those who are most like himself, never thinking in the long term or for what would benefit others, therefore consistently against the rights of women, against the rights of minorities, against the rights of workers, against the rights of indigenous people, and consistently for only those those who already have wealth and power.
@@jpe1 lol keep telling yourself that commie
@@marcoalejandro1407 if you don’t think that fairness should be the foundation of justice then I hope you can manage to always remain in a privileged class ‘cause it’s gonna suck for you when you are in a minority.
New London country resident here, New London still remains a shit hole with little employment opportunities. While the crime rates are going down and the worse neighborhoods are becoming better, the fort trumble and east new London neighborhoods remain some of the worst in CT.
I would definitely recommend checking out the Institute for Justice’s TH-cam channel. Lots of cases just like this one.
Great video. I don't think the present court would come down on the government's side. Is there any prospect of revisiting this issue via another case?
I rarely agree with Thomas and Scalia but they were absolutely correct in their ruling and I find it interesting as a liberal that all 4 Liberal judges sided with a massive corporation over a individual and the most conservative judges sided with the individual against the corporation. I disagree with Thomas and Scalia and O’Conner a lot but they where absolutely correct here.
So New London went from having a neighborhood that provided value to itself to having vacant land which provides no value whatsoever. Lol. When will cities and governments learn that selling yourself to huge corporations for the promise of jobs is a losing proposition. Foxconn in Wisconsin, anyone? Amazon 2nd HQ?
2 seconds into the video and im thinking "theres a place in Connecticut called New London? huh, nobody renamed it during revolutionary war or war of 1812?"
Thats why land value tax system should be introduced. No more "dilemma" about NIMBYs being NIMBYs - you have to pay tax to have right to use location, you don't have exclusive eternal ownership of location. Thats it.
It's not often that I encounter a SCOTUS case in which I agree with a conservative minority, but it does happen.
I live like right there, very little Pfizer employees actually live in New London. Most would never live in New London and chose surrounding communities like East Lyme, Waterford or Groton.
I'm not surprised. :( Have you heard of any recent plans to rebuild in Fort Trumbull?
No, Fort Trumball is just known as a really big park at this point. Haven’t heard of any redevelopment plans. I think it all comes back to New London High School having a reputation as a dump, Coast Guard and Navy people (there’s a LOT around here) don’t wanna live in the city because they want their kids going to a better school. Same cycle for every big employer or potential employer looking to open here, their employees just aren’t gonna send their kids to New London High School
@@regular_max9190 sounds like an easy and not so expensive problem to fix. They're idiots.
You should do a video on why there are so many people with the last name Davis.
Well I already did Smith lol
I’m glad this story had kind of a good ending!
I well remember this case for being the only time I agreed with Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia!
I can't believe RBG sided against the home owner.
RBG and the Liberals aren't Leftists. RBG was a socially progressives corporate dirt bag, like other liberals, while the conservatives are reactionary corporate dirtbags. They all suck. They just suck in different ways.
Should a private entity be able to condemn government property if this would lead to greater public benefit? This only seems fair to me.
I understand to a point for it if there's a bunch of derelict buildings and homes but not when people live there that are trying to revitalize it.
New London.... Thames river?? Sounds like some other place it’s a lot bigger and I’ve been there.... the name London, England