The green costs of Kelo

Lynne Kiesling

At PERC, Jonathan Adler has a trenchant post highlighting the environmental consequences of the eminent domain precedent established in the Supreme Court’s Kelo decision. In opposition to the Keystone pipeline, environmentalists are criticizing the use of eminent domain that could override their objections.  Jonathan observes that “… the use of eminent domain for economic development results in more environmental harm than if the market were left alone”, and refers to a paper that he and Ilya Somin have on the subject. Politicized use of government monopoly eminent domain force to redistribute land to politically-powerful developers has detrimental environmental consequences, in addition to being a flagrant violation of individual rights.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “The green costs of Kelo

  1. Pipelines, like railroads, highways, and electric wires, operated by public entities, or by common carriers, have been deemed to be public uses and suitable for the use of eminent domain, for many years. It has nothing to do with Kelo. Many of these projects would be undoable without eminent domain because of hold out problems.

Comments are closed.