Reviving necessity in eminent domain

Abstract

The necessity doctrine states that a condemnor may only take property via eminent domain that is necessary for furthering a proposed public use. With the advent of the Kelo v. City of New London decision and its deferential treatment of public use, necessity remains one of the few existing checks on government discretion in eminent domain. This article proposes a modest revival of the dormant necessity doctrine that preserves government discretion while curbing the reckless exercise of eminent domain.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,881

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

Domains of Discourse.Philip Hugly & Charles Sayward - 1987 - Logique Et Analyse 117 (17):173-176.
Democracy and city life.Loren A. King - 2004 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 3 (1):97-124.
Private Property and the Power of Eminent Domain.Peter P. Cvek - 1993 - Social Philosophy Today 8:131-149.
The Grounds of Necessity.Ross P. Cameron - 2010 - Philosophy Compass 5 (4):348-358.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-05-28

Downloads
14 (#990,520)

6 months
2 (#1,198,900)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references