Home The Long-Term Impact of Kelo v. City of New London: Comparing State Legislative and Judicial Responses
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

The Long-Term Impact of Kelo v. City of New London: Comparing State Legislative and Judicial Responses

  • Edward J. Lopez , H. Justin Pace and Jon Murphy ORCID logo EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: July 11, 2025
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

After 20 years since the U. S. Supreme Court ruling in Kelo v City of New London, the academic literature has mostly dried up. Yet cases of economic development takings continue to emerge across the country. This paper revisits some of the main issues from a law and economics perspective. What are the long-term effects of the Kelo ruling and the state reforms it spawned? How effective have regulations been in accomplishing their goals of reducing inefficient economic development takings? We review the quantitative literature that compared the 50 states’ legislative and judicial responses to Kelo, and then present a comparative case study of two states: Michigan, which enacted significant reforms, and North Carolina, which enacted relatively mild reforms. Over time, developers and local or state authorities explore increasingly creative ways to extract rents through loophole mining, boosted by a diminished spotlight. Thus, relatively strong takings powers that may appear efficient in the short run may, in the long run, lead to greater inefficiencies than intended, implying that stricter regulations may become more necessary in the long-run to maintain efficiency.

JEL Classification: K11

Corresponding author: Jon Murphy, Assistant Professor of Economics, Nicholls State University, Thibodaux, LA, USA; and Associate Fellow, Institute for an Entrepreneurial Society, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY, USA, E-mail: 

The authors wish to extend particular thanks to the Editors, anonymous referees, participants at the 93rd annual Southern Economic Association Meetings, and participants at the 2023 Scaled-Up Seminar at Western Carolina University, and Richard Wagner. The authors also thank Eden Punch and Tryston Weiss for their research assistance. All errors and omissions are our own.


References

Adler, Jonathan H. 2018. “The Stare Decisis Court?” The Volokh Conspiracy. Reason, July 8. https://reason.com/volokh/2018/07/08/the-stare-decisis-court/ (accessed November 26, 2024).Search in Google Scholar

Alchian, Armen A., and William R. Allen. 2018. Universal Economics. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, Inc.Search in Google Scholar

Associated Press and Ryan Jeltema. 2023. GM to Spend $6.5 Billion, Add 4,000 Jobs at Michigan Electric Vehicle Factories. https://www.abc12.com/news/business/gm-to-spend-6-5-billion-add-4-000-jobs-at-michigan-electric-vehicle-factories/article_885e5886-7af9-11ec-be2b-1774417f71c3.html (accessed February 22, 2024).Search in Google Scholar

Bachelor, Lynn W. 1982. “Reindustrialization in Detroit: Capital Mobility and Corporate Influence.” Journal of Urban Affairs IV: 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9906.1982.tb00063.x.Search in Google Scholar

Berger, Bethany. 2016. “Kelo and the Constitutional Revolution that Wasn’t.” Connecticut Law Review 48: 1431–41.Search in Google Scholar

Berliner, Dana. 2003. Public Power, Private Gain: A Five-Year, State-By-State Report Examining the Abuse of Eminent Domain. Washington: The Institute for Justice.Search in Google Scholar

Berliner, Dana. 2006. Opening the Floodgates: Eminent Domain Abuse in the Post-Kelo World. Washington: The Institute for Justice.Search in Google Scholar

Berliner, Dana. 2015. “Looking Back Ten Years after Kelo.” The Yale Law Journal Forum 125: 82–93.Search in Google Scholar

Broadus IV, Stephen F. 2015. “Ten Years after: Kelo V City of New London and the Not So Probable Consequences.” Mississippi College Law Review 34 (3).Search in Google Scholar

Buchanan, James M., and Wm. Craig Stubblebine. 1962. “Externality.” Economica 29 (116): 371–84. https://doi.org/10.2307/2551386.Search in Google Scholar

Bukowczyk, John J. 1984. “The Decline and Fall of a Detroit Neighborhood: Poletown V G.M. and the City of Detroit.” Washington and Lee Law Review 41: 49–76.Search in Google Scholar

Byrne, Paul F. 2017. “Have Post-Kelo Restrictions on Eminent Domain Influenced State Economic Development?” Economic Development Quarterly 31 (1): 81–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891242416671805.Search in Google Scholar

Calabresi, Guido, and A. Douglas Melamed. 1972. “Property Rules, Liability Rules, and Inalienability: One View of the Cathedral.” Harvard Law Review 85 (6): 1089–128.10.2307/1340059Search in Google Scholar

Carpenter, Dick M., and John K. Ross. 2010. “Do Restrictions on Eminent Domain Harm Economic Development?” Economic Development Quarterly 24 (4): 337–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891242410370680.Search in Google Scholar

Castle Coalition. 2007. 50 State Report Card: Tracking Eminent Domain Reforms Legislation since Kelo. Washington: The Institute for Justice.Search in Google Scholar

Coase, Ronald. 1960. “The Problem of Social Cost.” The Journal of Law and Economics 3: 1–44.10.1086/466560Search in Google Scholar

Cohen, Lloyd. 1991. “Holdouts and Free Riders.” The Journal of Legal Studies 20 (2): 351–62. https://doi.org/10.1086/467890.Search in Google Scholar

Dahlman, Carl. 1979. “The Problem of Externality.” The Journal of Law and Economics 22 (1): 141–62. https://doi.org/10.1086/466936.Search in Google Scholar

Department of Transportation. 2022. “Roadway Network Improvements: Triangle Innovation Point.” NCDOT Public Input. August. https://www.publicinput.com/Customer/File/Full/246c1193-cec7-40bd-864b-e90495dc4aa5 (accessed May 31, 2023).Search in Google Scholar

Foldvary, Fred E., and Daniel B. Klein. 2003. “The Half-Life of Policy Rationales: How New Technology Affects Old Policy Issues.” In The Half-Life of Policy Rationales: How New Technology Affects Old Policy Issues, edited by Fred E. Foldvary, and Daniel B. Klein, 1–18. New York: New York University Press.10.1007/s12130-002-1007-zSearch in Google Scholar

Gallagher, John. 2019. “Limits on Detroit’s Use of Eminent Domain Made Jeep Deal Much Harder to Do.” Detroit Free Press. https://www.freep.com/story/money/business/john-gallagher/2019/05/22/detroit-eminent-domain-fca-moroun-land-swap/3695388002/ (Accessed July 22, 2023).Search in Google Scholar

Gerken, Heather K. 2014. “Boden Lecture: The Real Problem with Citizens United: Campaign Finance, Dark Money, and Shadow Parties.” Marquette Law Review 97 (4): 904–23.Search in Google Scholar

House Select Committee on Eminent Domain Powers. 2006. “Interim Report to the 2006 Regular Session of the 2005 General Assembly of N.C.”Search in Google Scholar

Jones, Bryan D., and Lynn W. Bachelor. 1993. The Sustaining Hand: Community Leadership and Corporate Power, 2nd ed., Rev. 1993. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.Search in Google Scholar

Kane, Edward J. 1988. “Interaction of Financial and Regulatory Innovation.” The American Economic Review 78 (2): 328–34.Search in Google Scholar

Kerekes, Carrie B. 2011. “Government Takings: Determinants of Eminent Domain.” American Law and Economics Review 13 (1): 201–19. https://doi.org/10.1093/aler/ahq023.Search in Google Scholar

Kim, Iljoong, Hojun Lee, and Ilya Somin. 2017. Eminent Domain: A Comparative Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781316822685Search in Google Scholar

Laffer, Arthur, Stephen Moore, and Jonathan William. 2017. “Rich States, Poor States.” American Legislative Exchange Council. https://alec.org/publication/rich-states-poor-states-10th-edition/ (accessed April 6, 2023).Search in Google Scholar

Lopez, Edward J., and J. R. Clark. 2013. “The Problem with the Holdout Problem.” Review of Law & Economics 9 (2): 151–67. https://doi.org/10.1515/rle-2012-0031.Search in Google Scholar

Lopez, Edward J., R. Rodd Jewell, and Noel D. Campbell. 2009. “Pass a Law, Any Law, Fast! State Legislative Responses to the Kelo Backlash.” Review of Law & Economics 5 (1): 101–35. https://doi.org/10.2202/1555-5879.1268.Search in Google Scholar

Lopez, Edward J., and Sasha M. Totah. 2007. “Kelo and its Discontents: The Worst (or best?) Thing to Happen to Property Rights.” The Independent Review 11 (3): 397–416.10.2139/ssrn.1620707Search in Google Scholar

Mann, Terrance E. 1999. “The U.S. Campaign Finance System under Strain.” In Setting National Priorities: The 2000 Elections and beyond, 449–78. Washington: Brookings Institution.Search in Google Scholar

Miceli, Thomas J. 2010. “Free Riders, Holdouts, and Public Use: A Tale of Two Externalities.” Public Choice 148: 105–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-010-9648-z.Search in Google Scholar

Miceli, Thomas J. 2011. The Economic Theory of Eminent Domain: Private Property, Public Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511793776Search in Google Scholar

Miceli, Thomas J., and Kathleen Segerson. 2021. “Assessing Kelo’s Legacy: Do Increased Taxes and New Jobs Justify Use of Eminent Domain?” The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics 63 (2): 161–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11146-020-09772-7.Search in Google Scholar

Moore, Jeff. 2017. “H.B. 3 Would Add Eminent Domain Protections to the Constitution.” The North State Journal. February 18. https://nsjonline.com/article/2017/02/eminent-domain-constitutional-amendment/ (accessed April 6, 2023).Search in Google Scholar

Morriss, Andrew P. 2009. “Symbol or Substance? An Empirical Assessment of State Responses to Kelo.” Supreme Court Economic Review 17 (1): 237–78. https://doi.org/10.1086/656057.Search in Google Scholar

Polinsky, A. Mitchell, and Steven Shavell. 1982. “Pigouvian Taxation with Administrative Costs.” Journal of Public Economics 19 (3): 385–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/0047-2727(82)90063-9.Search in Google Scholar

Riles, Annelise. 2014. “Managing Regulatory Arbitrage: A Conflict of Laws Approach.” Cornell International Law Journal 1 (47): 63–119.Search in Google Scholar

Somin, Ilya. 2004. “Overcoming Poletown: County of Wayne V Hathcock, Economic Development Takings, and the Future of Public Use.” Michigan State Law Review: 1005–39.Search in Google Scholar

Somin, Ilya. 2008. “Controlling the Grasping Hand: Economic Development Takings after Kelo.” Supreme Court Economic Review 15: 183–271. https://doi.org/10.1086/656031.Search in Google Scholar

Somin, Ilya. 2009. “The Limits of Backlash: Assessing the Political Response to Kelo.” Minnesota Law Review 93: 2100–78.Search in Google Scholar

Sorens, Jason, and William Ruger. 2011. Freedom in the 50 States. Washington, DC: Cato Institute. https://www.freedominthe50states.org/.Search in Google Scholar

Thaler, Richard. 1980. “Toward a Positive Theory of Consumer Choice.” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 1 (1): 39–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2681(80)90051-7.Search in Google Scholar

Wilson, Bart J. 2020. The Property Species: Mine, Yours, and the Human Mind. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780190936785.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2025-01-20
Accepted: 2025-06-08
Published Online: 2025-07-11

© 2025 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 20.11.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/rle-2025-0005/html
Scroll to top button