by Craig Steckley

For 60 years, Frank Burgryn and his three siblings lived peacefully in two homes on their 32-acre Christmas tree farm in Bristow, Connecticut. But when the City of Bristow decided it could raise more tax revenue on the property if it were transferred over to Yarde Metals Corporation, the Burgryn family was forced to leave, making way for an industrial park.

One might wonder: How can government take my property only to give it to someone else? The answer: eminent domain. This allows local governments to take private property for a "public use" when they provide "just compensation."

One might think that "public use" means that the property actually has to be "used" by the public in some way. However, this is not the case following the Supreme Court's recent decision in Kelo v. City of New London. In that case, the Court ruled that if the government determines that someone's property will promote "economic development" or create more tax revenue in the hands of another, then the government can take it. The "just compensation" requirement means that they still will have to pay you fair market value for the property, but this does not take into account many costs such as relocation costs, business losses if your property was used as a business, or sentimental value.

In Kelo, the Supreme Court had the opportunity to curb eminent domain abuses, but instead chose to let the abuses escalate. Prior to the Kelo decision, the Court ruled that if property owners kept their property in sub-par condition -- or allowed it to become "blighted" -- the government could take the property and give it to someone else. This ruling resulted in the problem of developers lobbying local governments to make bogus blight determinations.

For instance, in order to build upscale condominiums and retail stores in Lakewood, Ohio, the city government labeled a neighborhood of colonial homes "blighted" because their yards were "too small" and they didn't have two-car garages. Although there were numerous problems with local governments making bogus blight determinations, a blight determination requirement arguably still provided some protection to homeowners and small businesses. However, now that economic development or higher tax revenues are the only limitations, homeowners and small businesses essentially have no protection. Big businesses will almost always pay more taxes on the land than a private homeowner or small business and will often be seen as promoting economic development.

But this story does have a silver lining. Although the Supreme Court has ruled that nothing in the Constitution prevents local government from taking your home to give to a business, it did say that each state could restrict its own eminent domain power. The supreme courts of nine states had already done so and ruled that the eminent domain power may not be exercised solely for the basis of raisin tax revenue.

In response to public outrage after the Kelo decision, many states have introduced legislation to curb the eminent domain power, and one state, Alabama, has already enacted stronger property protections. Congress is also in the process of considering a bill that would prevent a state from using federal funds to procure land for purposes of economic development.

What a refreshing change: thanks to Kelo, legislators are actually considering bills that would limit government's power for a change. Hopefully, this will result in actual change and is not just lip service to help them save face with constituents.

Ideally, the Supreme Court will overturn its decision in Kelo v. City of New London that threatens everyone's property rights. Recently, in response to the Kelo decision, Justice Souter and Justice Breyer -- two of the justices voting with the majority in Kelo -- had their homes threatened by the eminent domain power. Perhaps this will make it hit closer to "home" for them and they will see the error of their ways.

For now, the Supreme Court has called on the states and other branches of government to do their job and protect private property rights. It's also now our responsibility as citizens to make our opinions known by calling on our legislators to end eminent domain abuse in our state.

Craig Steckley is a third-year law student and a summer research intern for Americans for Prosperity Foundation.