Economics Of Law

       Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005) The Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution provides, among many other things, that” . . . private property [shall not] be taken for public use, without just compensation.” Some time ago, the city of New London, Connecticut was working on a project to develop 90 acres of land into office buildings, housing and public facilities. This land was near a large research center being built by a multi-national pharmaceutical company. To complete the project, the City needed to buy property owned by a number of homeowners on the site. Most owners sold to the City, but the owners of 15 homes refused. The City used its eminent domain power to take the land of those refusing owners, and paid the homeowners for their property. Those homeowners sued to stop the project and to save their homes. The case reached all the way to the United States Supreme Court, and the Court decided for the City and against the homeowners, in Kelo v. City of New London, 545, U.S. 469 (2005). The Supreme Court’s decision has been severely criticized ever since. 1 The full text (with the relevant part highlighted): Amendment V No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. Your assignment: Decide whether you think the Supreme Court decided Kelo either correctly or incorrectly from an economic point of view, and write a memo that defends your choice. I have uploaded to the “assignment 1” folder a number of readings, including the case itself, a Harvard Law Review article discussing it, and a few newspaper articles on it. Feel free to do your own research to supplement this material. Note:  you can pick either side – if you think the decision was correct, arguethat; if you think it was incorrectly decided, argue that.  confine your memo to economic arguments. I am not concerned withwhether you think the decision was fair or whether the Supreme Court’s legal analysis of the Fifth Amendment was correct.  I will grade you on: o how well you apply what we have learned in class; o the power of your argument – can you convince me? o the quality of your writing – organization, grammar, spelling, etc. I pay a lot of attention to this!  it may be helpful to refer to the “grading rubric” document in the “assignments” folder in this regard. Your memo should: o be no longer than 2 pages, double spaced (that’s about 1,000 words). It can be shorter, if you think you can do a good job in less space; o be typed using Times New Roman 12-point font, 1” inch margins; o look good. A hard copy of your memo is due at the beginning of class Thursday, March 8, 2018. Late submissions will be marked down 10 percent per day. I will not accept submissions by email.