Kelo v. New London: 10 years later
The dispute resolved by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2005 pitted the city and the New London Development Corporation against seven property owners who did not want to sell their 15 combined properties on the Thames River peninsula.
GALLERIES: Kelo v. New London: 10 years later
John Paul Stevens, a moderate midwestern Republican and former antitrust lawyer from Chicago who evolved into a savvy and sometimes passionate leader of the Supreme Court's liberal wing and became the third-longest-serving justice on the high court before his retirement in 2010, died July 16 at a hospital in Fort Lauderdale, Fla. He was 99.
The stars were out for the world premiere of the newly released movie “Little Pink House,” based on New London’s Fort Trumbull eminent domain fiasco that ended in 2005 with a United States Supreme Court ruling in favor of the city.
MORE STORIES: Kelo v. New London: 10 years later
The City Council on Tuesday authorized Mayor Michael Passero to sign an agreement with the Renaissance City Development Association that will expand their role in in exploring development opportunities in the city.
Korchula Productions has funding in place to make a movie of "Little Pink House" — the book that detailed the Supreme Court case of former Fort Trumbull homeowner Susette Kelo — and plans to start filming in September in Vancouver.
If a Supreme Court decision is acknowledged to be wildly unpopular even by the justice who wrote the opinion, and polls show a majority of the public disagrees with the decision, might the Supreme Court overturn its ruling?
To the naked eye, Fort Trumbull may look today like a barren tract of land that has not seen much progress in the decade since the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the city and its development corporation’s use of eminent domain to make way for major development projects. But the Renaissance City Development Association, the new name of the New London Development Corp., says the peninsula is primed for development.
A decade after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the city and its development corporation could legally take Susette Kelo’s home and 14 other properties, she reflects on her role in the landmark case.
The Institute for Justice argued in favor of a narrow interpretation of “public use” — that the taking of the condemned property must be by government or private owner that is legally required to serve the public.