Irrelevance of “Public Use” in State Eminent Domain Reforms
研究发现，美国各州在2005年Kelo案后的征用改革中，“公共用途”这一宪法限制已变得无关紧要，多数州允许经济或私人征用，导致改革存在矛盾和实施挑战。
“Public use” is a constitutional limitation on the governmental authority to take private property using eminent domain. This study finds that it is irrelevant, an artifact of the federal constitution, in state reforms enacted in the last decade. Expansive language permitting economic development and private development have rendered public use to be merely symbolic. Forty-six states enacted takings reforms following Kelo v. New London, a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2005; approximately 80% of those states allow economic or private takings while also invoking the public use. This mixed-method analysis and normative theoretical grounding explain stark contradictions in the prevailing reforms nationwide, resulting in substantive implementation challenges that may be mitigated by sensitivity to regime values, one of which is property.