« Yonkers shuts out villages over lawsuit | Main | Push poll (likely from FCR) boosts Boyland against Montgomery in Senate race »
July 31, 2006
Case Won on Appeal (to Public)
The NY Times
By Adam Liptak
Some views from legal experts on the issue of eminent domain, a year after the controversial Kelo ruling by the Supreme Court and on the heels of the Ohio State Supreme Court ruling for homeowners in Norwood (a case that is very similar to Bruce Ratner's Brooklyn bid to seize private property for his arena and 16 high-rise tower complex):
Sometimes, Supreme Court cases have a way of highlighting issues that had been absent from the national agenda, and the cases can provoke reactions that have a far greater impact than the ruling itself.
“I always tell my students,” said Douglas Laycock, a law professor at the University of Texas, “that one of the best things you can do is lose a case in the Supreme Court.”
...
“The decision brought to light this incredible rift between what lawyers and cities thought was the law and what the American people thought was the law,” Ms. Berliner said. “This is certainly the situation of losing the battle and winning the war.”The cases that tend to provoke the biggest popular reaction are those in which justices seem to be out of touch with ordinary people, said Michael J. Klarman, a law professor at the University of Virginia.
“Almost all of the instances of backlash,” Professor Klarman said, “are conservative, populist reactions to decisions that seem elitist.”
...
“There is no doubt that Kelo has inspired a level of reaction that denies power that a rational community would like a city council to have,” said Douglas W. Kmiec, a law professor at Pepperdine University who opposes Kelo but expresses doubts about the initiative.
Posted by lumi at July 31, 2006 7:39 AM