iTunes: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/deep-dive-with-the-institute-for-justice/id1480726134 Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/35xKoi0948xMAEW45Wzga7 Google: www.google.com/podcasts?feed=aHR0cHM6Ly9pai5vcmcvZmVlZC9kZWVwLWRpdmUv Sticher: www.stitcher.com/podcast/institute-for-justice-2/deep-dive-with-the-institute-for-justice?refid=stpr

When I was a toddler we had beach front properly in Bremerton Washington the government not sure if it was City County or the state but the took our property through eminent domain claiming they needed it for public use. I'm in my 50's now and the land is still vacant.

Most people did not Read the 2005 Supreme Court decision nor fully understand it. The court ruling stated and made it clear that cities can do it IF "JUST compensation" is paid. They did not say if market value or assessed value or a fair price is paid and instead the said "JUST compensation" is paid. "Just Compensation could be 10 times more than fair value or assessed value. It is up to a Jury in a court room to decide what is Just, not the city and not the developer. A city once used eminant domain to take my 2 acre lot to build a new town hall on. They offered me $180k I wanted $220k rather than pay me the $220k I asked for it I had to take them to court. A jury awarded me $480k as JUST compensation for the lot.

If you want to stop or slow down eminent domain make the laws so if they want your land they have to pay you 10 times the current value of the raw land plus any improvements like buildings.

Interresting topic! Extrapolating that logic, that you must be of a certain value to the city or be expropriated, can lead to the basic foundation of this: "The rights to own property is correlated directly to your net worth rather than being rooted in rights given by the constitution".

Any land taken by Eminent Domain, and nothing has really been used by it in a reasonable time or if the project was abandoned, should be given back to whomever owned it for free.

Yup the Kelo case still makes my blood boil. Worst SCOTUS decision in my lifetime. It must be corrected.

This was a clear violation of the founders interest in the eminent domain re-emburse requirement. The State law is another matter. Corporate government entities are evil and should be unconstitutional!!

Eminent Domain is terrible policy and abuse should be expected. Good job to the state legislatures that did the work we need them to do👍💪❤️!!

This case should be called Kelo vs. Pfizer, since the city of New London was depending on Pfizer make use of any commercial redevelopment on the Fort Trumbull neighborhood site. The leveled site is still just an empty lot, leveled at a cost of $78 million to New London taxpayers.

Do they want killdozer? Cause this is how you get killdozer.

That Supreme Court ruling was idiotic. Let's hope to God this is revisited and repaired.

The main problem I have with this "taking" is that the compensation is almost always not even close to being "just." At a minimum, the owner should be compensated 20% beyond "fair market value" and any tenants should get the equivalent a a month rent for every year they living on the property. If the government (or even a developer) truly "needs" the property, extra payments will be down in the noise. If they are taking it for the heck of it, the extra might inhibit them a bit and will give the owners and tenants a fair shake.

So, in louisiana, I can just go to some rich guy's house and tell him "I am a common carrier pipeline, and I am acquiring your land through the power of iminent domain. Get your crap and get out." Man, talk about a fast track to home ownership.

No corporation should be able to take your home or land!

I've never been fond of the government, but listening to this simply outrages me...I can't even finish it.

Isn't this exactly what happened with that guy that made that "killdozer"? I was rooting for that guy to be honest.

Kelo should be seen as evidence that judges are getting bribes from developers. That's the only reasonable explanation for that decision.

Please do an analysis on how the federal agency, CDC, overrode private contracts between landlords and renters with a moratorium on evictions. While it was ended by the SC yesterday, it bulldozed property rights during its tenure. Landlords received no compensation for their property while they still had to pay taxes and mortgages on property they were forbidden to control.

I learned from Wickard v. Filburn that lawyers can get the Supreme Court to agree that laws mean the exact opposite of what they say.

The judges that voted in favor of kelo should be removed from the bench as they are clearly corrupted and not serving the people's best interests.

If Politicians and or Judges feared for their lives over these decisions we'd have all of our rights still.

The injustice in the world baffles me. The fact SCOTUS does this among many other violations along with random nut jobs gunning down random people instead of gunning down the criminals in government speaks volumes about the societal moral compass.

There is no law stating a case cannot be fabricated for the sole purpose of having it overturned.

I finally sold my house because the city allowed investors to use the police to harass me. With less equity gotten than should have. But I managed to sell to a scum investor who wasn't harassing me. About half of the properties in the neighborhood are Investor owned rentals. On one occasion the police acted friendly and tried to invite themselves into my home. I asked whether they had a warrant. Every contact by the police was initiated by a lie with no consequences to the investors.

The awful post-script is that they never even put the stolen land to productive use. They bulldozed her house and the land has sat empty for 16 years now.

Back in the 90s Jeep Corporation, or at least whoever was signing off on their executive orders at the time, did this to a neighborhood in north Toledo. And after they insisted that they needed to force homeowners and business owners alike off of this ungodly large swath of land, news began circulating about just how much of that land was left to sit idle. I don't know if any of it has since been developed or how much. But I'm sure that information is available out there for anybody who feels inclined to go looking for it.

Whether they change it or not doesn't matter much to people with guns because I'd have to be out of bullets before you get my property...

The Court is toothless if it has no executive branch to enforce their rulings. This is the most significant news in the past month and barely reported. Recent SCOTUS ruling deeming COVID19 emergency measures unconstitutional where lessee is able to squat without paying lessor has been ignored by the executive branch which further extended the rent moratorium on a federal level. When the Executive no longer enforces rulings and continues to write its own laws, only one effective branch of the government exists.

Excellent video. IJ is among the most valuable ally of the American people of all non-profits, for profit companies, and government agencies. Is there a single better entity in America (private or public) that pursues the essence of justice better than IJ does?

The lack of housing, the cost of land, is all protected by zoning and seizure for taxes. County's keep land out of the market to keep realestate high and "protect other owners".

"A peasant is complaining? Silence yourself madam!" - the Supreme Court

Eminent Domain is exactly why the Founding Fathers gave us our inalienable right of owning and bearing arms. If more people took up arms against illegal seizure such as this, governments would think twice before attempting such ill-begotten tomfoolery.

I remember some people wanting to form a “group” for real estate projects aimed solely at the homes of the Justices who voted for that CCP like ruling. One of them had a home kind of in a forested region that had been in his family for generations. They though a hotel would make better use of the land. They probably were not able to get enough small investors to get anywhere with the idea. But it was, and is, a great idea. Think of the revenue and jobs that would generate from a 15+story hotel in the Hamptons?

I changed my name to Eminent Domain. So every time a government registers a property to Eminent Domain, it becomes mine!

It is coming to the point that we have to use shotgun justice. Legal costs are too expensive to fight.

What prevents the hardware store from picking another site in that town for the store. They still have the finances. The town might end up having a LOT of parks.

They do this in Las Vegas like a deli cuts meat - it's how they do business! From the neighborhoods destroyed for airport property that actually became the land of retail chains, to the monorail debacle, to the vintage bottle of wine for the assemblyman as a carrot for passing another power rate increase for the power company, because 6 increases in 6 years wasn't enough.

This story is very similar to what was going on in the town of Aurora, Illinois. The city was coaxed , by a casino company, to acquire private property within the city for the purpose of allowing the the "Company" to build a gambling casino in the downtown area. This took place in the early '90's during Mayor David Pierces' administration. Look in to that story.

A supreme court justice's childhood home was taken for a similar purpose.

I can tell you what would happen if they tried to take my property through imminent domain so some rich jackwang can have it. They would pay for it IN BLOOD!

SCOTUS needs a mechanism to be able to pick an issue and ask for expert advice, and change rules. Having to wait for the perfect disaster causes unnecessary delay, and makes for suboptimal revisions.

They already let the CDC do it twice and give no repercussions.

I had no idea this was a thing. I knew they could take over property for roads and stuff but had no idea they could take it for "economical reasons"

Back in 1972 NYC used eminent domain to take 4 city blocks in queens to build a public school. One old lady held out and would not budge. The police came to remove her and she shot and killed one cop and injured another before she was killed herself. I was a teenager when this happened. My mother told me at the time the old lady had cancer and wanted to die in her home. Well she did and took a cop with her. Really sad situation.

It's sad when you realize that eminent domain was originally intended for the military and then only during times of war!

This is outrageous !

In the mid 2000's, Woodbury, NJ the city declared about 5% of the city as "in need of redevelopment". The hospital which needed to expand was unable to privately buy out the adjacent properties for decades asked to be excluded from the redevelopment plan. The city let them out of the redevelopment plan. Fast forward 10 years and the hospital picked up and moved 10 miles away and officially opened in December 2019 and closed the Woodbury hospital. The hospital had planned this the whole time. Since they were not covered by the redevelopment plan, it will give them flexibility in marketing the property when they sell it. Covid has delayed action on the property for the past two years and the State even refurbed the closed hospital in the spring of 2020 for Covid patients but was never used.

"The rationale in Kelo was that we're going to take this property and give it to someone richer and the richer person will pay more taxes". That sounds like Robin Hood in reverse.

Not that infamous as the government still has to pay the fair market price. Zoning is used more abusivly. I know of a community that zoned a location so the homeowners couldn't improve or maintain their property. Even that is better than forced sterilization without due process which the Supreme Court decided was constitutional.

Not sure of how "expropriation" is different, but In other Anglo-saxon nations it is assumed that the government can "expropriate" your property to use it for a "public good." For example for a road or a school or even a town hall, but right of first refusal goes to the original owner if the government decides it no longer has use for the land. Now that would seem to be the way to remedy this situation in the USA, eminet domain can be used only for the government to take and use land and then it must be offered to the original owners if the government no longer needs it.

Keep Pressing!!!

Nicely done, thank you for this information... Hope this gets turned around...

Citizens united is a pretty crap decision too.

Let suppose this were to be allowed, regardless of whether one views are against. how should it be done to be fair. One example: assess the current value of all properties in a zone. Suppose that this is $10M. Conduct an auction open to all developers. Possibly divide the zone into lots, so multiple developers are participants. If the money raised is $20M, then each existing owner get 2X the pre-eminent domain value. There could be a requirement that bidding starts at 1.4X or something. Another possibility is also give the former owners first rights to buy at pre-construction price of an appropriate number of units of any condos or something, this could be resold later for additional gain

The Supreme Court must overturn Wickard v. Filburn, which states that without government permission, a person can't grow wheat (or any food really) even if it is for his own private consumption, simply because that wheat could conceivably cross state lines.

What a scintillating interview!!! Thank you!!!!! I really learned a lot and it was EASY to listen to!

I live in southold town and it’s the most corrupt township on longisland

I grew up in AZ where water is scarce. One of the few families who was there since before it was a territory of the United States had there water taken by eminent domain. A week later their fam was burned.

This reminds me of one case of I.D. that was a few years ago. A person bought a piece of property. They looked over ALL of the zoning laws, got all the proper permits, made sure that all their i's were dotted and t's were crossed, and began to build an off-grid home. The place had its own well for water, it had a massive septic tank, with proper field, the place had solar panels and two medium sized windmills. They did not get gas hooked up. The only "on grid" things they had, as it were, was cable internet and satellite TV. The place, otherwise, was purely off-grid when it came to water and power. The power companies in the area bitched heavily because this large home, and the two barns, did NOT have any wires connecting the home or barns to the grid. But the state allows for that, so they couldn't go to the state to force it. So the companies then turned to the CEO's and said they were needing to expand to "make sure the states power needs were met" and, therefore, that the land was needed, HIS land specifically, for another substation to be placed. He fought, refusing to sell, so they got the city to force him out and used Imminent domain to condemn his home claiming it was "blighted", i.e. unlivable. Despite the fact the place was built up to code, in fact, was built to specs even better than the codes required, and the man had, had all the permits and had worked within the law. They took his home from him, did NOT give him fair market value, in fact I think it was condemned by the city and he was trespassed off his own property, he wasn't even allowed to go in and get his personal belongings, and it was bulldozed. If I can find the article again, I'll post it. But this isn't uncommon I.D. is used, A LOT, to stop people from building off-grid homes, especially when power companies object to the idea of someone being allowed to live off-grid even if the state allows for it.

As an American i thank GOD for Institute for Justice

My deed specifies that I can use it for any purpose including waste i.e. blight or no use at all.

The court should apply the law, the Supreme Court decision isn't the biggest problem here. It's the legislature's issue, even the constitution can be changed if Congress would actually do its job...

absoutly disgusting decision SCOTUS . It still boggles my mind how SCOTUS could even rule in favor of this.

They were not blighted properties as people would use the term, but just a legal designation with no meaning so the city could take the homes.

Man, let's hope so. One of the top 10 worst SC decisions.

Why didn't they give these property owners the option of keeping their land and opening a business? They could have just rezoned it, right? A percentage of the profits made by the new owner should be part of the moneys paid to the people that have their property taken by imminent domain.

Its good not only to hear what the PTB have done, but also what they've TRIED to do.

US government did this to the Bruce Family in Manhattan Beach, CA and they recently got their land back!

The firearm issue is an issue where the USSC will not have the luxury to make a "bad" decision. We all know what happens if they do make a bad decision.

Great job keeping America informed👍👍🥇🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

I remember this case had a strong influence on my suspicion of our government and how far it had strayed from its original mission.

Too many people believe Kelo was a pro-capitalism decision. It was not. It was a pro-business decision and those two are not the same. Property rights are a key component of capitalism.

Great explanation

It should have been called legalized theft of private property. It was not the intent of the founders in spite of the SCOTUS. Legislation from the bench.

Very informative without being political. Much appreciated these days. Thank you.

I live in Connecticut, and Kelo vs New London is still heartbreaking. The city spent $78 million bulldozing the houses and to this day it is a vacant lot.

Thanks for putting that zoom glitch counter in there. :)

I can't believe people allow this behavior to go unpunished

The question is who is the government? Let’s establish that first.

IF A CITY OR COMPANY TRIED TO DO THAT WITH MY PROPERTY I WOULD GO BUY A GOOD RIFLE AND GO HUNTING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The pipeline company was probably planning to sell the abandoned route to someone else.

My question regarding imminent domain for public use: what the time limit is a government entity required to put the land to use? Then, if that entity does not use the land for such, who is entitled to own it? For instance, initial owner never wanted to sell property, city takes it. City really took it because a board member wanted the land as cheap as possible AND could not buy it (found out after the fact). I believe the entity should ALWAYS give it back to the previous owners, at a hugely discounted price!!!!

I just found this organisation and I am very impressed.

Now the loop around to prevent protection is that counties setup economic development committees and foundation nonprofits overseeing the economic development heavily staffed with attorneys, politicians, and CEOs running these nonprofits. These nonprofits are Paid by the county supervisors with 6 or 7 digit salaries from county funding in addition to state and federal funding. These nonprofits have land zoned for commercial first THEN purchase property from its own members making tens of millions OR the elite TAKE it from a poorer person, zone it commercial , then sell it making millions OR nonprofit takes it thru immanent domain, zone for commercial, then sell for millions. Its impossible to fight these entities they have become too powerful with elite and political influence. County supervisors have passed their responsibility to these nonprofits. They even use rural water federal grant funding on private rural land owned by members utilizing all grant funding instead of using for what it was intended. Then sell it for millions. Its out of hand.

This was a good one .

The government should never be allowed to procure property. Sure, I can see them purchasing it from the owner if the owner agrees but that's it

I had a local Twp use the code officer to harass me for 2 years in court. I beat them dozens of time in court. Then, they got a local crooked judge to take my property in a hearing, where he threatened to have the code officer ticket me daily, if I didn't give them my property. This same judge is being reprimanded by the Judicial Conduct Board currently, for other misdeeds of the same nature. I need to find someone to sue them, in my case.

Yep And when these economic development nonprofits that now run counties that have become so political and powerful and they purchase land from elite buds and pay millions, obtain big bond money\grant funding and hire buddy contractors for about a year then the contractors go belly up bankrupt walking away with all the money the "stupid" nonprofit paid them upfront.. And how many times did they do this in my area? Twice with no accountability or payback....they just move on from one buddy to the next and continue their games. They are too powerful now with politicians involved heavily with them due to grant funding. The More layers of nonprofits they have, the more grant funding (double dipping) they get. All these responsibilities need to revert back to county supervisors!!!!! Hell supervisors sit back and do nothing now.... The supervisors let these nonprofits run the county and the supervisors cut 6 digit payroll checks to them from our tax payroll. The nonprofit staff members and board hire their own private subsidiaries or private businesses and pay their own businesses for services paid by the nonprofits boards in which they serve. This is how arrogant they are. Worse than HOAs attitudes.

They can't take your property if you have a land patent

Would be interesting to see a strategy centered around people not fighting to keep their homes, but instead arguing for a much higher payment by exploiting the economic interest angle. Put it on the developer to show how much more economic activity they would get out of the property, and use that figure to increase the amount paid for "just compensation." The developer can't estimate too low or it weakens the case of the economic benefit justifying eminent domain. Curious if arguing that eminent domain is being used to circumvent making a fair offer would be a stronger strategy than fighting to prevent it, period. If nothing else, it could make the risk of going that route a lot higher for a developer and make it a less attractive tactic.

New London seized the property and bulldozed the homes. When the property was handed over to the developer, who reneged on the deal. Instead of getting an increase in tax revenue from a strip mall they got a large lot that remained vacant as of 2018, collecting no taxes of any type on the property.

Individual liberty above all is important.

Why is a park considered a legitimate public purpose? Government's purpose is to protect our rights, not provide for our recreation.

The City Council and the Mayor has previously taken private land to keep Jeep/Chrysler happy! They also took land to help the (MCO) University of Toledo expand and a lot of that space is where nice homes used to be. They have did this to the benefit of Corporation's to whom they often give 20-25 year tax abatement's, and then they move out just before the Bill is Due! They have torn down entire Neighborhood's they didn't like, the resident's were forced into Rental housing and now the land is nothing but "Green Space and New Tree's!" Hospital's and Universities as well as Industry and recently, we have Amazon who was basically given the land.

I hope they do this case on a new season of C-SPAN Landmark Cases. Is this Manifest Destiny in a legal case? Interesting issue. Saint Louis has a long history of this, and we have a terrible state government.

Wow Melanie is stunning!

No way USSC is overturning Kelo. The power of the state isn't ever getting turned back. A knee on your neck forever.

This is a GREAT site.....always interesting....

This is great information.