• Research Report

    Your Home Is Their Castle: Ten Simple Ways Government Can Abuse Eminent Domain

    posted May 23, 2006 by Daren Bakst
    Current law does not protect North Carolinians from eminent domain abuse. The state and local governments can seize private property for economic development reasons. However, the potential for eminent domain abuse is far more extensive than these “economic development takings.” From the state’s dangerous urban redevelopment law to the government finding clever ways to seize property for private businesses, North Carolina needs comprehensive protection from eminent domain abuse.
  • Press Release

    Ten Eminent Domain Abuses in N.C.

    posted May 23, 2006
    RALEIGH – Last year’s landmark Kelo decision by the U.S. Supreme Court opened people’s eyes about government taking property for economic development. A new John Locke Foundation Spotlight shows…
  • Press Release

    Open Season on Private Property in N.C.

    posted February 5, 2006
    RALEIGH – North Carolina’s Urban Redevelopment Law is so vague, it allows the state to seize private property with just the thinnest of excuses. That’s according to a Spotlight report…
  • Research Report

    A Threat to Private Property: N.C.’s Broad and Subjective Urban Redevelopment Law

    posted February 5, 2006 by Daren Bakst
    North Carolina’s Urban Redevelopment Law is a major threat to private property rights. It is so broad that it would permit the government to seize private property that is not blighted and even to take property for economic-development purposes. Any urban redevelopment law should only permit the government to seize private property if it meets a narrow and common sense definition of blight.
  • Research Report

    A Model Amendment: Protecting North Carolinians’ property rights

    posted January 5, 2006 by Daren Bakst
    North Carolina needs a constitutional amendment to protect property rights that will contain very specific language. This approach will ensure that courts are unable to undermine the rights that the amendment is designed to protect. The amendment should define key terms such as “public use” and expressly prohibit all takings for private use, including those for economic development purposes.
  • Press Release

    Property Owners Need Constitutional Protection

    posted January 5, 2006
    RALEIGH – North Carolina lawmakers need to amend the state’s Constitution to give property owners more protection against governments’ use of eminent domain powers. That’s the finding in a new…
  • Press Release

    JLF Analyst: Amend the State Constitution

    posted October 17, 2005
    RALEIGH — The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Kelo v. City of New London drastically weakened the property rights of all citizens, according to a new analysis published today by…
  • Research Report

    Property Rights After Kelo: North Carolina Needs a New Constitutional Amendment

    posted October 16, 2005 by Daren Bakst
    The United States Supreme Court’s opinion in Kelo v. City of New London drastically weakened the property rights of all citizens. North Carolinians can protect themselves by amending the state constitution. An amendment is necessary because state legislation does not provide adequate protection of property rights. All fundamental rights, especially property rights, should be protected in the state’s highest law, the state constitution.
  • Press Release

    “Agenda 2002 Tour” Begins Sept. 3

    posted August 25, 2002
    RALEIGH — Policy analysts from the John Locke Foundation will discuss taxes, the state budget, property rights, education, the state’s economy, and other key issues this election season in a…

property rights by Author