Symbol or Substance? An Empirical Assessment of State Responses to Kelo

Morriss, Andrew P.

doi:10.2139/ssrn.1113582

Cited by 10 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to other authors who have used the report, it is "a thorough analysis" (Morriss, 2008, p. 14) with a rating system "strongly attuned to the fine-grained details of the legislation (i.e., loopholes and exemptions) that affect the strength of the reform and in some cases even distinguish symbolic from substantive legislation" (Sharp & Haider-Markel, 2008, p. 564). As the report codifies and other authors who have used it discuss (Morriss, 2008;Sharp & Haider-Markel, 2008), there is variation in states' legislative response to the Kelo decision. Some entail only minor procedural changes (requiring more public hearings or greater public notice), creation of study committees, temporary moratoria on use of eminent domain, or payment of enhanced compensation.…”

Section: Sample and Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Do Restrictions on Eminent Domain Harm Economic Development?

Carpenter

Ross

2010

Economic Development Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After the U.S. Supreme Court upheld in the Kelo decision the use of eminent domain for private-to-private transfer of property for economic development, public outrage was followed by attempts to restrict such use of eminent domain. Opponents of restrictions predicted dire consequences for state and local economies. This study considers whether restricting the use of eminent domain for economic development results in negative economic effects. The authors examine economic indicators before and after legislative or judicial restrictions on eminent domain across all states and between states based on the type of legislative/judicial change. Results indicate that there appear to be no negative economic consequences resulting from limiting the use of eminent domain when examining economic indicators before and after legislative/judicial change. Adopting either moderate or major eminent domain restrictions appears to create no economic ill effects when analyzing differences in trends based on the type of legislation passed or scope of judicial decision.

show abstract

Section: Sample and Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…More recent work examined factors that predict the adoption of legislation designed to limit the use of eminent domain for economic development (Lopez & Totah, 2007;Morriss, 2008;Sharp & Haider-Markel, 2008). Although interesting, such studies do not examine the relationship between eminent domain and economic development.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Restrictions on Eminent Domain Harm Economic Development?

Carpenter

Ross

2010

Economic Development Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(Nadler et al 2008 are one of several who reference the statebased legislation in this way; the term is also in the title of Sandefur 2006 andSomin 2009.) This is especially intriguing since The Institute for Justice-the litigator on behalf of Susette Kelodeveloped and distributed model state legislation aimed at addressing the key issues in the case (Morris 2009). …”

Section: 'Merely Hortatory Fluff'-a Hollow Victory?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…That is, those who stood to lose by the adoption of nonsymbolic state-based laws (as described by Morris,"environmentalists and government employees and officials in declining urban areas" (2009: 254)) shaped the legislative process so as to result in a symbolic rather than substantive outcome. Morris (2009) is not sure, and Somin (2009) is absolutely certain that Sandefur's explanation is insufficient.…”

Section: 'Merely Hortatory Fluff'-a Hollow Victory?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At the time of the writings noted here (all of which were prepared prior to the 2008 economic meltdown), the authors had a basis for hope. Morris (2009) and López et al (2009) both conclude that there was a strong correlation between states where there was strong economic activity and the existence of substantive (as opposed to symbolic) state legislation. Why? "…”

Section: 'Merely Hortatory Fluff'-a Hollow Victory?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

All Sound, No Fury? The Impacts of State-BasedKeloLaws

Jacobs¹,

Bassett²

2011

Planning & Environmental Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Political Divide, Weak Property Rights, and Infrastructure Provision: An Empirical Examination of Takings Decisions in Jerusalem

Levine‐Schnur¹

2021

Law Soc. Inq.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article I use a unique hand-coded dataset of all expropriation exercises in Jerusalem over a twenty-five-year period to test the distribution of the expropriation burden across political communities. I identify the ethnoreligious group to which the impacted landowner belongs and the community that would benefit from the decision. I find that Palestinian property constitutes 38 percent of all land taken over the years, while only 10 percent of all land taken has been repurposed for their local community needs. Conversely, Jewish owners have contributed only 4 percent of all land taken while benefiting from 33 percent of the land taken for their community needs. I also find that land not owned by Jews has a higher propensity to be taken for citywide purposes by ten to twenty-three times than Jewish land, depending on the purpose and the type of property rights involved. This sharp gap can be attributed to the political power relations in the city. The case study enables me to test the relationship between weak property rights and infrastructure provision. As property rights are formally recorded and recognized selectively in some but not in all parts of the city, the article provides the first empirical evidence to the effect of weak property rights on the risk of expropriation. I find that the propensity for noncommunity purpose takings of nonformalized land for which Palestinians claim ownership but have no official records to is significantly higher when compared to formalized Palestinian land. This outcome contradicts the conventional wisdom in the literature that weak property rights help explain limited infrastructure development.

show abstract

Symbol or Substance? An Empirical Assessment of State Responses to Kelo

Cited by 10 publications

References 0 publications

Do Restrictions on Eminent Domain Harm Economic Development?

Do Restrictions on Eminent Domain Harm Economic Development?

All Sound, No Fury? The Impacts of State-BasedKeloLaws

Political Divide, Weak Property Rights, and Infrastructure Provision: An Empirical Examination of Takings Decisions in Jerusalem

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About