Analysis the concept of “Eminent Domain” Case Study Public Use Clause with special reference to “Kelo” case

Rezaei, Mahdi; Mahdavi Zahed, Mahdi; Moradi Berelian, Mahdi

doi:10.22054/qjpl.2017.7176

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

https://doi.org/10.22054/qjpl.2017.7176

Abstract

Eminent Domain is the legal term describing the government's right to take private property, without the owner’s consent, to provide some benefit to the public use, but the power of eminent domain and the classic freedom stemming from property rights are fundamentally opposed. So the power may be invoked only for a public purpose, but what constitutes public purpose is wide open to interpretation and use.
This article interprets the “public use” clause & presents narrow & broad definition of public use within eminent domain law through a case study the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Kelo v. City of New London and decisions in several other important cases are problematic.
The article concludes that the theory of public use based on secret purchases and private influence provides a socially desirable, administrable, and constitutional mechanism for distinguishing between public and private uses and reforming the law of eminent domain.
v,kni

Keywords

References

- آقایی طوق، مسلم، (1392)، «تحلیلِ تحلیل اقتصادی حقوق»، حقوق تطبیقی، شماره 2.

- حسینی، سیدشمسالدین و شفیعی، افسانه، (1386)، «تعامل دولت و بازار و رویکرد تنظیم در اقتصاد ایران؛ تأملی در سیاست‌های کلی اصل 44 قانون اساسی»، پژوهش‌ها و سیاست‌های اقتصادی، شماره 43.

- هداوند، مهدی، (1385)، «درآمدی بر مقررات‌گذاری اجتماعی»، حقوق اساسی، شماره 2.

- یاوری، اسدالله، (1393)، «درآمدی بر مفهوم تنظیم‌گری حقوقی»، مطالعات حقوق تطبیقی، دورۀ 5، شماره 2.

ب) انگلیسی

Articles

- Toll, Brock L, (2007), “The Implications of Eminent Domain” in a Post-Kelo World, Major Themes in Economics.

- Melton, Jr, Buckner F, (1996), “Eminent Domain, Public Use, and the Conundrum of Original Intent”, NATURAL RESOURCES JOURNAL, Vol. 3.

- Cohen, Charles E, (2006), “Banning Economic Development Takings”, Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, Vol. 29.

- Kelly, Daniel B, (2006), “The “Public Use” Requirement in Eminent Domain Law: A Rationale Based on Secret Purchases and Private Influence”, Harvard Law School, Vol. 92.

- Hurd, David I, (2007), “Eminent Domain: Resolving Ethical Conflicts Faced by the Engineer”, Ohio Valley Regional Student Conference. Paper 1.

- Chartier, Gary, (2006), “Urban Redevelopment and Land Reform: Theorizing Eminent Domain after Kelo”, Legal Theory, Volume 12.

- Knap, Gregory S, (2008), “Maintaining Government Accountability: Calls for a “Public Use” Beyond Eminent Domain”, INDIANA LAW JOURNAL, Vol. 83:1097.

- Nadler, Janice & Diamond, Shari Seidman, (2008), “Eminent Domain and the Psychology of Property Rights: Proposed Use, Subjective Attachment, and Taker Identity”, Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, Volume 5, Issue 4.

- Bethards, Matthew S, (2004), “Condemning a Patent: Taking Intellectual Property by Eminent Domain”, Aipla Quarterly Journal, Volume 32, number 1.

- Farjad, Nasim, (2007), “Condemnation Friendly or Land Use Wise? A Broad Interpretation of the Public Use Requirement Works Well for New York City”, Fordham Law Review, Volume 76, Issue 2.

- Tremblay, Luc B, (2015), “An Egalitarian Defense of Proportionality-Based Balancing”, Oxford University Press and New York University, School of Law, Vol. 12, No. 4.

Public Law Researsh

Analysis the concept of “Eminent Domain” Case Study Public Use Clause with special reference to “Kelo” case

References

References

Volume 18, Issue 53
March 2017
Pages 1-1

Analysis the concept of “Eminent Domain” Case Study Public Use Clause with special reference to “Kelo” case

References

References

Volume 18, Issue 53March 2017Pages 1-1

Volume 18, Issue 53
March 2017
Pages 1-1