IV 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 880 

Expressing the sense of the House on the occasion of the first anniversary 

of the Supreme Court’s decision in Kelo v. City of New London. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 20, 2006 

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey submitted the following resolution; which was 

referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the House on the occasion of the 

first anniversary of the Supreme Court’s decision in Kelo 

v. City of New London. 

Whereas June 23, 2006 is the first anniversary of the United 

States Supreme Court’s decision in Kelo v. City of New 

London; 

Whereas the limitations on Government power contained in 

the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment provide an 

essential safeguard of the property rights of the people 

of the United States; 

Whereas the majority decision in Kelo granted local governments broad power to take the property of one private 

party and transfer it to another private party if the local 

government decided that the transfer would promote economic development; 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 880 IH 

Whereas the Supreme Court in Kelo once again engaged in 

the dangerous practice of judicial activism by creating 

policy, instead of interpreting the Constitution and defending the rights protected by it; 

Whereas the Kelo court authorized an expanded power to 

take private property that is far broader than the power 

the people intended to grant in the Constitution; 

Whereas Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, in a dissent joined 

by three other Justices, suggested that the decision would 

lead to governments taking from the poor and giving to 

the rich, saying that ‘‘[a]ny property may now be taken 

for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout 

from this decision will not be random [because t]he beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms’’; 

Whereas Justice O’Connor effectively argued that the majority opinion in Kelo eliminates ‘‘any distinction between 

private and public use of property—and thereby effectively [deletes] the words ‘for public use’ from the 

Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment’’; 

Whereas the House of Representatives showed its strong disapproval of the Kelo court’s interpretation of the Takings 

Clause by passing, by a vote of 231 to 189, an amendment to the Departments of Transportation, Treasury, 

and Housing and Urban Development, the Judiciary, 

District of Columbia, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (H.R. 3058) that prohibited any funding made available under that bill from 

being used to enforce the judgment of the Supreme Court 

of the United States in the Kelo case; and 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
3 

•HRES 880 IH 

Whereas the House of Representatives showed its further 

support for private property rights in November 2005 by 

passing the Private Property Rights Protection Act of 

2005 (H.R. 4128), which seeks to curb abuse of the 

Takings Clause by Federal, State, and local Government 

agencies, with strong bipartisan support and by a vote of 

376 to 38: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) reaffirms its commitment to protecting private 

3 property rights as the foundation of liberty and the pur4 suit of happiness in the Constitution; and 

5 (2) reiterates its strong support for the Private Prop6 erty Rights Protection Act of 2005. 

Æ 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS