In this column, Hughes notes that while 35 states are working on â€œlegislation limiting or abolishing eminent domainâ€, the Kelo decision â€œdid not expand the jurisprudence of eminent domain beyond the settled practice of the past 50 years. The court has not spawned some new demon that will devour our homes unless elected officials come riding to our rescue.â€
Instead, what politicians are attacking â€œhere is not eminent domain but our faith that government is capable of defining a public use....The use of eminent domain must be well regulated and always demands just compensation. But an assault on eminent domain itself is an assault on our ability to govern ourselves. If we can't define a public purpose, then all government action is illegitimate.
It's just another attack on the idea that government can improve the lives of ordinary people and their communities.â€
Thanks to Margy Waller