WASHINGTON, Feb. 22 (UPI) -- The U.S. Supreme Court Tuesday heard argument in a Connecticut case on whether government may condemn property solely for economic development.
In a very high-profile "takings" case, property owners contend condemning property for such development, not to erase slums or blight, violates the Fifth Amendment's ban on depriving anyone of property "for public use without just compensation."
They contend condemning property solely for development, not for public use, is unconstitutional.
Wilhelmina Dery was born in her house in New London, Conn., in 1918 and lives there still.
When the city tried to take her property and others through eminent domain procedures for a shopping mall and other purposes, the Supreme Court of Connecticut eventually ruled "economic development constitutes a valid public use under the takings clauses of the state and federal constitutions."
Dery and other property owners then asked the Supreme Court for review, saying the case had repercussions across the country.
The justices are expected to rule in the case before recessing for the summer in late June or early July.
