13
IV. Activities
Susette Kelo owned a little pink house on the Fort Trumbull peninsula. When
the NLDC tried to take her (and her neighbors’) land using eminent domain, the
case went all the way up to the Supreme Court.
It was an ideal poster child for the argument in favor of limiting eminent
domain. One study found more than 10,000 examples of fiactual or threatened
condemnation for private parties between 1998 through 2002.” Out of all these,
build a new headquarters in New London.”
The land grab looked even worse because the leader of the NLDC, the non-
profit that took the land, was married to a Pfizer executive, who told the Hartford
Courant in 2001 that fiPfizer wants a nice place to operate.” I share Mr. Somin’s
belief that the corporation chief figenuinely believed that she was acting for the
public good and was not simply trying to advance the private interests of Pfizer.”
Still, it didn’t look great.
Moreover, as public policy, the plan looked bad. The use of tax breaks and
Other such eminent-domain-abetted economic development projects, such
as Detroit’s 1981 seizure of the Poletown neighborhood for a General Motors
factory, look equally unwise.
Yet the US Supreme Court supported the New London taking by a 5–4
margin. And to the more than 80 percent of Americans who disagreed—including
both Rush Limbaugh and Ralph Nader—the court appeared to be radically rede-
fining property rights. According to Mr. Somin, this view is wrongheaded.