|
||||
|
||||
Eminent Domain and the Psychology of Property Rights: Proposed Use, Subjective Attachment, and Taker IdentityJanice NadlerNorthwestern University School of Law; American Bar Foundation Shari Seidman DiamondNorthwestern University, School of Law & American Bar Foundation Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, Vol. 5, pp. 713-749, 2008 Northwestern Law & Econ Research Paper No. 08-15 Northwestern Public Law Research Paper No. 08-24 American Bar Foundation Research Paper No. 08-03 Abstract: The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Kelo v. City of New London, allowing governments to force the sale of private property to promote economic development, provoked bipartisan and widespread public outrage. Given that the decision in Kelo was rendered virtually inevitable by the Court's earlier public use decisions, what accounts for the dread and dismay that the decision provoked among ordinary citizens? We conducted two experiments that represent an early effort at addressing a few of the many possible causes underlying the Kelo backlash. Together, these studies suggest that the constitutional focus on public purpose in Kelo does not fully, or even principally, explain the public outrage that followed it. Our experiments suggest that subjective attachment to property looms far larger in determining the perceived justice of a taking. We have only begun to map out the contours of this response, but these initial findings show promise in helping to build a more democratic model for the law and policies dealing with takings.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 47 Keywords: eminent domain, law & psychology, property, subjective value JEL Classification: K30 Accepted Paper SeriesDate posted: July 19, 2008Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
FAQ
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Copyright
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.375 seconds