John Locke on Individual Property Rights Analytical Essay by Nicky

John Locke on Individual Property Rights
An examination of the thought of John Locke in regards to property and liberty.
# 149269 | 4,516 words | 8 sources | APA | 2011 | US
Published on Dec 03, 2011 in Law (Constitution) , Law (Property) , Political Science (John Locke)


$19.95 Buy and instantly download this paper now

Description:

The paper analyzes the case of "Kelo V. New London" and the interpretation of eminent domain by the federal courts. The paper explains the views of John Locke on wealth, government and property and on how the protection of property rights is a requirement in regards to ensuring individual freedoms. The paper also focuses on the case "Wayne County v. Hathcock" and shows how the federal courts have left it primarily to the individual U.S. states to prescribe what they consider to be the proper use and range of eminent domain

Outline:
Introductionhttp://www.academon.com/editor/do/edit.html
Kelo V. New London
Interpretation of Eminent Domain by the Courts
John Locke
Wayne County v. Hathcock
Individual States and Eminent Domain
Discussion

From the Paper:

"In the case Kelo V New London (04-108) 545 US 469 (2005) 268 Conn 1, 843 A 2d 500 the respondent in this case, specifically the city of New London approved an integrated development plan that had been developed specifically for the purpose of revitalizing its economy which was ailing. The Petitioner, Susette Kelo has lived in her home since 1997 and has extensively improved her home. The Petitioner, Wilhelmina Dery was born in her home in 1918 and is reported to have lived there for her entire life sixty years of which she has lived there with her husband, Charles. This case involved a total of nine petitioners and 15 properties.
"There is nothing alleging that the properties are in any way blighted or that they are in any type of poor conditions "rather, they were condemned only because they happen to be located in the development area." (Kelo et al. v. City of New London et al.certiorari to the supreme court of Connecticut No. 04-108.) The city purchased the largest part of the property from sellers, who were willing however, condemnation proceedings were issued when the petitioners, and the owners of the remainder of the property refused to sell their property to the city."

Sample of Sources Used:

  • Restoring Our Heritage of Property Rights (2006) Mackenzie Center for Public Policy. Online available at: http://www.mackinac.org/archives/2006/heritage.pdf
  • Hansen, David (2007) Kelo v. New London: Economics and Ethics. 2007. The University of North Carolina at Charlotte North Carolina. Online available at: http://econ.duke.edu/dje/2007_Symp/Hansen.pdf
  • Liles, Brett D. (2007) Reconsidering Poletown: In the Wake of Kelo, States Should Move to Restore Private Property Rights. Arizona Law Review. Vol. 48:369. Online available at: https://www.law.arizona.edu/Journals/ALR/ALR2006/vol482/Liles.pdf
  • Kelo, et. Al v. City of New London, Connecticut, et al in the Supreme Court of the United States. No. 04-108. Washington DC 22 Feb 2005. Online available at: http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/04-108.pdf
  • Rose, Sharon (2007) Kelo v. City of New London: A Perspective on Economic Freedoms. Law Review Vol. 40 Issue 5.Online available at: http://lawreview.law.ucdavis.edu/issues/Vol40/Issue5/DavisVol40No5_Rose.pdf

Cite this Analytical Essay:

APA Format

John Locke on Individual Property Rights (2011, December 03) Retrieved January 17, 2020, from https://www.academon.com/analytical-essay/john-locke-on-individual-property-rights-149269/

MLA Format

"John Locke on Individual Property Rights" 03 December 2011. Web. 17 January. 2020. <https://www.academon.com/analytical-essay/john-locke-on-individual-property-rights-149269/>

Comments