This November, six states will vote on constitutional amendments dictating exactly when eminent domain can and cannot be used for private use. The amendments come in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Kelo v. New London , which held that states and municipalities have wide discretion in determining what qualifies for eminent domain. Property rights advocates have argued that constitutional amendments are more binding than bills and offer the most protection against eminent domain abuse.
September 14, 2006 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
This November, six states will vote on constitutional amendments dictating exactly when eminent domain can and cannot be used for private use.
The proposed amendments come in the wake of the 2005 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Kelo v. New London, which held that states and municipalities have wide discretion in determining what qualifies for eminent domain.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
A large and well-established Tampa company is seeking a contracts administrator to support the company's in-house attorney and manage a wide...
We are seeking an attorney to join our commercial finance practice in either our Stamford, Hartford or New Haven offices. Candidates should ...
We are seeking an attorney to join our corporate and transactional practice. Candidates should have a minimum of 8 years of general corporat...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
