Critics blasted the waste when public planners built a bridge to nowhere in Alaska and subway tunnels with no trains in Ohio. However, a botched freeway project in California costs more than money. It destroyed the homes and dreams of hundreds of families in predominantly Black and lower-income neighborhoods.
Before the California Department of Transportation ditched plans for an Interstate 710 extension through El Sereno, Pasadena and South Pasadena, the agency took 400 homes by eminent domain.
The land grab occurred in the 1960s. Now, decades later, the government is selling the real estate to private buyers without ever using the land. As the deals close, wounds remain open.
People’s homes are their sanctuaries. They put down roots, make memories and invest for future generations. Pushing families aside to make room for a public project — no matter how important — is serious business. Eminent domain should be an act of last resort, yet state and local officials often flex their power prematurely.
They take first and plan later.
This is what happened to Susette Kelo in New London, Conn. She lost her little pink house for no good reason when the city decided to take her property and give it to private developers. A book and motion picture depict her fight, which she took to the Supreme Court. Our public interest law firm, the Institute for Justice, represented her.
The 2005 decision, Kelo v. City of New London, cleared the way for the government to proceed. However, after the city evicted Kelo and her neighbors, the developer could not obtain financing and abandoned the project. The neighborhood became an undeveloped wasteland — home to a feral cat colony.
Stories like this are far too familiar.
Transportation officials wiped out 100 businesses and 700 homes for a highway in Akron, Ohio. However, after clearing the land in the 1960s, the project never delivered as promised. Ohio decommissioned the highway in 2017 and is now trying to undo the damage. But some things cannot be reversed — especially after 60 years.
Los Angeles had its own boondoggle in the 1970s. Anxious about overcrowding at Los Angeles International Airport, transportation officials used eminent domain to grab 17,000 acres to expand Palmdale Regional Airport. Yet, the project never took flight, and people lost their land for nothing.
Sometimes, the lack of development is intentional.
Officials in Southold, N.Y., did not like that Ben and Hank Brinkmann were outsiders in their small town on the eastern tip of Long Island. So, the town took the Brinkmanns’ land to stop the brothers from building a hardware store.
The town’s problem is the Constitution. Under the Fifth Amendment, eminent domain requires “public use,” and stopping lawful entrepreneurship does not count. To proceed, town officials had to lie. They announced a sham park on the Brinkmanns’ land as a pretext to stop the otherwise lawful business.
This so-called park would not have trails, benches, playgrounds or ballfields. Southold calls it a “passive-use park,” which means no improvements. If the town gets its way, the vacant lot will stay vacant.
Despite the cynical wordplay, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals approved the scheme. The Brinkmanns now find themselves in the same situation as Kelo. They need the Supreme Court to step in and block eminent domain. The brothers petitioned the high court to consider their case in June, with representation from our firm.
These cases show a troubling pattern. Public officials sometimes abuse eminent domain through recklessness. Other times, they act with malice. Either way, they cause harm.
Before evicting property owners, governments should pause and ensure they genuinely need the land for an essential public purpose. Otherwise, bureaucrats’ half-baked ideas and petty motives will continue to crush the dreams of hardworking families.