Book Description
Homeowners and politicians have simply ignored the Supreme Court's ruling in Kelo v. New London. Informal eminent domain moratoria - established when the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case - have simply continued post-Kelo. It has become evident that government is not willing to send in the police in order to remove people from their housing, even though they have the legal right to do so. This means enforcement of the housing provision of the New Bill of Rights (see article on SSRN discussing this proposal): No individual shall be involuntarily deprived of housing. This language is strict scrutiny for housing. The informal moratoria are strict scrutiny for housing in the eminent domain context. At the same time, it is not clear what other circumstances would permit removal of the people benefiting from these moratoria. For example, as time goes on, the moratoria tend to enforce other provisions of the New Bill of Rights. For example, the Bill also says: No individual shall be involuntarily deprived of liberty. Since, once the condemnation orders were in effect, the persons housed were no longer owners of their property and were subject to rent which none have paid, they are clearly trespassing. This extraordinary state of affairs implies elevated scrutiny for liberty, in the context of trespass where the facts show housing.