IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/rlecon/v21y2025i3p597-627n1004.html

The Long-Term Impact of Kelo v. City of New London: Comparing State Legislative and Judicial Responses

Author

Listed:
  • Lopez Edward J.

    (Professor of Economics and Distinguished Professor of Capitalism, Western Carolina University, Cullowhee, NC 28723, USA)

  • Pace H. Justin

    (Associate Professor of Business Law and Director of the School of Accounting, Finance, Information Systems, and Business Law, Western Carolina University, Cullowhee, NC 28723, USA)

  • Murphy Jon

    (Assistant Professor of Economics, 7881 Nicholls State University , Thibodaux, LA, USA)

Abstract

After 20 years since the U. S. Supreme Court ruling in Kelo v City of New London, the academic literature has mostly dried up. Yet cases of economic development takings continue to emerge across the country. This paper revisits some of the main issues from a law and economics perspective. What are the long-term effects of the Kelo ruling and the state reforms it spawned? How effective have regulations been in accomplishing their goals of reducing inefficient economic development takings? We review the quantitative literature that compared the 50 states’ legislative and judicial responses to Kelo, and then present a comparative case study of two states: Michigan, which enacted significant reforms, and North Carolina, which enacted relatively mild reforms. Over time, developers and local or state authorities explore increasingly creative ways to extract rents through loophole mining, boosted by a diminished spotlight. Thus, relatively strong takings powers that may appear efficient in the short run may, in the long run, lead to greater inefficiencies than intended, implying that stricter regulations may become more necessary in the long-run to maintain efficiency.

Suggested Citation

  • Lopez Edward J. & Pace H. Justin & Murphy Jon, 2025. "The Long-Term Impact of Kelo v. City of New London: Comparing State Legislative and Judicial Responses," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 21(3), pages 597-627.
  • Handle: RePEc:bpj:rlecon:v:21:y:2025:i:3:p:597-627:n:1004
    DOI: 10.1515/rle-2025-0005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/rle-2025-0005
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/rle-2025-0005?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • K11 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Property Law

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:rlecon:v:21:y:2025:i:3:p:597-627:n:1004. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyterbrill.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.