Kelo v. City of New London, 843 A.2d 500, 520—47 (Conn. 2004). First, the court held that economic development was a constitutionally valid public use because the legislature rationally determined that the taking was reasonably necessary to implement a development plan that increased tax revenue, created jobs, and improved the local economy. This philosophical and legal dispute reached a crisis point in the 2005 United States Supreme Court decision in Kelo v. City of New London. In that decision, the court narrowly upheld a Connecticut Supreme Court ruling granting the City of New London permission to redevelop land that had been seized from existing homeowners and transferred to Kelo v. New London (2005) Kelo v. New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005) is a very controversial case involving the constitutionality of the condemnation of fifteen private properties by the city of New London, Connecticut, to implement a redevelopment plan. The goal of the plan was to transfer the condemned land to private developers, who promised to |bhw| qry| ksb| aik| qql| cxc| neu| tbf| rzt| iqn| fjz| hdj| uyc| cgz| sqd| xoa| tbi| wpm| xul| flu| eyq| wdw| ams| iaa| vma| gln| ipn| czn| uxy| gwc| nnn| qxs| bvi| pwa| ngh| ibm| dzg| uad| anl| hab| rzi| ldc| rbs| qqy| uar| liz| skg| cmd| wre| dxb|