I wouldn't normally post an article here until early Tuesday morning, but this is news that is cause for celebration!

Twenty-three years ago, a disastrous Michigan Supreme Court decision started serving as a precedent that has resulted in widespread property rights abuse all across the U.S. The infamous Poletown case allowed the city of Detroit to bulldoze an entire neighborhood with more than 1,000 homes and 600 businesses in order to give the property to General Motors for an auto plant.

Since 1980, other courts have used that Poletown decision as a guide in upholding the condemnation of private property, through eminent domain, for private development in the name of so-called "economic development." Abuse has since run rampant. The libertarian Institute for Justice, which has battled against such abuse and who filed a brief in this new "Hathcock" case, has estimated that there were 10,000 properties either taken or threatened with eminent domain for private parties in the U.S. just between 1998 and 2002.

The Michigan Court actually made two rulings against eminent domain abuse. In the other case, they ruled against the Detroit Wayne County Stadium Authority, and returned property to it's original owner.

In the Hathcock case, the court said:

"We overrule Poletown, in order to vindicate our constitution, protect the people's property rights and preserve the legitimacy of the judicial branch as the expositor, not creator, of fundamental law."

Courts rarely so clearly overturn previous verdicts, so this ruling should have a major effect on cases all across the country. Taking private property for redevelopment... in the name of economic benefit... has been a curse on so many people, and I've written on that subject 3 times here. It was the subject of my very first No Force article 14 months ago, with Is your home your castle? and again last December, with NIMBY, but yours is fair game, and a follow-up to the victory by the organized Crystal Heights residents, in You CAN (and must) fight City Hall

Virtually every municipality in this area has redevelopment projects underway or planned that would likely have never have arisen were it not for the original Poletown decision. I first became involved with the issue when the city of Richfield took property from many homeowners and businesses to facilitate the construction of the huge Best Buy headquarters campus at 494 and Penn avenue. Like so many abusive projects, the Best Buy land-grab was clearly wrong, and the city got it's hands slapped in court, but citizen opposition didn't get organized in time to prevent the destruction.

These Michigan decisions, and the unending work of libertarians from groups like the Institute for Justice and the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, may now have turned the tide in protecting private property rights from unethical takings to provide land to other private developers.

As you drive around your city, notice each new construction project underway, and try to remember what used to be in that location. Chances are very good that what you're viewing in each of those instances is now, and should have always been, illegal confiscation of property from some in order to benefit others. City councils and other governmental agencies have become suckers (and co-conspirators) for slick developers who make exaggerated claims about creating jobs, attracting new residents, and raising the tax base... with no thought to the people who have already invested their time, effort, and personal money into those properties.

"The Poletown decision gave cities the green light to take property for
private parties," said Chip Mellor, president and general counsel of the Institute for Justice.  "It was a terrible mistake.  Now, the Michigan Supreme Court has restored the rights of all Michiganders to keep their homes and businesses, even if another, politically connected private business wants them.  This is a great day for property rights nationwide."

I must again applaud the effort and skill of the Institute for Justice, which has carefully chosen cases and then argued them brilliantly. I cannot help but believe that their arguments have played a critical role in this landmark decision, as they have in many others.

You may, like me, wish that extraordinary legal work was not needed in order to prevent government from overrunning individuals. We may wish that all courts consistently protected individual rights, but such is not the case, so we all owe a debt of gratitude to those who have fought in our place. I urge you to study the IJ website and some of the cases they've won for individuals being threatened by the force of government... cases they've also won for you and I.

Here is the full press release from the Institute for Justice, and to the court's Hathcock ruling (a PDF file)