What was the ruling in Kelo v. New London (2005)?

The ruling in Kelo v. New London (2005) affirmed that the city's use of eminent domain for private redevelopment qualifies as public use under the Fifth Amendment. The case involved a dispute where the city sought to take private property to transfer it to a private developer, hoping to generate economic growth and increase tax revenue. The Supreme Court ruled that this intended use constituted a valid public purpose, emphasizing that the government has broad discretion in determining what constitutes "public use." The decision underscored the notion that revitalizing economically depressed areas can serve the public interest, even if the end result is private ownership.

The ruling led to significant discussions about property rights and government authority, as some viewed it as a controversial expansion of the government's power to seize private land. The ruling did not state that eminent domain could only be used for government projects, nor did it invalidate the use of eminent domain for public parks or establish a blanket prohibition against seizing land from residents. Instead, the decision supported a broader interpretation of what might fall under public benefit, allowing for new economic development initiatives.