Federalism and Kelo: A Question for Richard Epstein

22 Pages Posted: 13 Jun 2009 Last revised: 22 Jul 2009

Date Written: June 12, 2009

Abstract

The irrepressible Richard Epstein has been one of the most provocative and wide-ranging of contemporary legal scholars. According to Epstein’s own account, he started out as a natural rights libertarian, but then morphed slightly into a utilitarian. Other important strands of conservative thought have not commanded his consistent allegiance. Epstein has never shown any affinity, for example, to Burkean traditionalism. Moreover, Epstein’s interest in the structural principle of federalism, which favors the decentralization of power where feasible, has run hot and cold. For example, he has sharply criticized the Supreme Court’s Kelo decision that declined to rule that a locality’s misuse of the power of eminent domain violated the federal Public Use Clause. This essay criticizes the merits of the redevelopment project at issue in Kelo, but also argues, on federalist principles, that the Supreme Court of the United States was correct in that instance to decide that it should not be on the front lines of the battle against eminent domain abuse.

Keywords: federalism, Kelo, eminent domain, Richard Epstein, conservative thought

JEL Classification: K11

Suggested Citation

Ellickson, Robert C., Federalism and Kelo: A Question for Richard Epstein (June 12, 2009). Tulsa Law Review, Forthcoming, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1418671

Robert C. Ellickson (Contact Author)

Yale Law School ( email )

P.O. Box 208215
New Haven, CT 06520-8215
United States
203-432-7033 (Phone)

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
172
Abstract Views
1,363
Rank
314,280
PlumX Metrics