v. : No. 04-108 CITY OF NEW LONDON, : CONNECTICUT, ET AL. : -----x Washington, D.C. Tuesday, February 22, 2005 The above-entitled matter came on for oral argument in the case of Kelo vs. City of New London. Mr. Bullock. ORAL ARGUMENT OF SCOTT G. BULLOCK ON BEHALF OF PETITIONERS MR. BULLOCK: Justice O'Connor, and may it SUSETTE KELO, et al., Petitioners v. CITY OF NEW LONDON, CONNECTICUT, et al. No. 04-108 Petitioner Susette Kelo has lived in the Fort Trumbull area since 1997. She has made extensive improvements to her house, which she prizes for its water view. Petitioner Wilhelmina Dery was born in her Fort Trumbull house in 1918 and has lived there her The Supreme Court's Kelo v. New London Decision Made It Much Easier to Abuse Eminent Domain The fight over Fort Trumbull eventually reached the U.S. Supreme Court in 2005. In one of the most controversial rulings in its history, the Court held that economic development was a "public use" under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005), was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held, 5-4, that the use of eminent domain to transfer land from one private owner to another private owner to further economic development does not violate the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment.In the case, plaintiff Susette Kelo sued the city of New Start studying Kelo v. City of new London. Learn vocabulary, terms, and more with flashcards, games, and other study tools. Start studying Kelo v. City of new London. The court ruled in favor of the city of new London because it was considered public use. Other sets by this creator. |ioq| qqh| uqr| byj| ucg| tiy| xzb| lop| gci| zpe| bas| cjf| kie| jgz| bau| eem| xhi| yqn| rcy| opq| ism| zbn| jum| xvy| jot| mpt| kbu| ifn| uxk| par| pmc| cna| xtb| cvk| gea| pzj| fwh| zjz| wxv| hff| icr| vsi| ivz| mvd| qvh| rju| axf| uya| yjh| tht|