Local governments may seize property for economic development purposes. Noted for converting the "public use" requirement of the Takings Clause to "public purpose." Decided June 23, 2005 (argued February 22, 2005). Opinion of the Court: John Paul Stevens → go there Dissenting: O'Connor, Thomas. Applied: the Fifth Amendment → go there Applied: the Fourteenth Amendment → go there Topic: Takings Clause. Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005), is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held, 5–4, that the use of eminent domain to transfer land from one private owner to another private owner to further economic development does not violate the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. In the case, plaintiff Susette Kelo sued the city of New London, Connecticut, for violating her civil rights after the city tried to acquire her house's property through eminent domain so that the land could be used as part of a "comprehensive redevelopment plan". Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the five-justice majority that the city's use of eminent domain was permissible under the Takings Clause because the general benefits the community would enjoy from economic growth qualified as "public use". Wiki link