Kelo v. City of New London
E140035
Kelo v. City of New London is a landmark 2005 U.S. Supreme Court case that expanded the interpretation of “public use” under the Takings Clause to allow government seizure of private property for economic development projects.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Kelo v. City of New London canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T1213134 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Kelo v. City of New London Context triple: [Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, influencedDecision, Kelo v. City of New London]
-
A.
Alden v. Maine
Alden v. Maine is a 1999 U.S. Supreme Court decision that expanded state sovereign immunity by holding that states are generally immune from private suits for damages in their own courts under federal law.
-
B.
Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe
Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe is a landmark 1971 U.S. Supreme Court case that significantly limited federal agencies’ discretion in approving highway construction through public parks and strengthened judicial review of administrative decisions.
-
C.
Chiafalo v. Washington
Chiafalo v. Washington is a 2020 U.S. Supreme Court case that unanimously upheld states’ authority to penalize or replace “faithless electors” who do not vote in line with their state’s popular vote in presidential elections.
-
D.
Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp.
Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp. is a 1977 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the standard for proving discriminatory intent in equal protection challenges to facially neutral government actions, particularly in the context of zoning and housing discrimination.
-
E.
National League of Cities v. Usery
National League of Cities v. Usery was a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case that temporarily limited Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause by holding that federal wage and hour regulations could not be applied to traditional state government functions.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Kelo v. City of New London Target entity description: Kelo v. City of New London is a landmark 2005 U.S. Supreme Court case that expanded the interpretation of “public use” under the Takings Clause to allow government seizure of private property for economic development projects.
-
A.
Alden v. Maine
Alden v. Maine is a 1999 U.S. Supreme Court decision that expanded state sovereign immunity by holding that states are generally immune from private suits for damages in their own courts under federal law.
-
B.
Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe
Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe is a landmark 1971 U.S. Supreme Court case that significantly limited federal agencies’ discretion in approving highway construction through public parks and strengthened judicial review of administrative decisions.
-
C.
Chiafalo v. Washington
Chiafalo v. Washington is a 2020 U.S. Supreme Court case that unanimously upheld states’ authority to penalize or replace “faithless electors” who do not vote in line with their state’s popular vote in presidential elections.
-
D.
Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp.
Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp. is a 1977 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the standard for proving discriminatory intent in equal protection challenges to facially neutral government actions, particularly in the context of zoning and housing discrimination.
-
E.
National League of Cities v. Usery
National League of Cities v. Usery was a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case that temporarily limited Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause by holding that federal wage and hour regulations could not be applied to traditional state government functions.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (49)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
eminent domain case ⓘ landmark decision ⓘ |
| appliedPrecedent |
Berman v. Parker
ⓘ
Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff ⓘ |
| aroseInJurisdiction | Connecticut ⓘ |
| clarifiedThat | public use includes public purpose ⓘ |
| concernsClause |
Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
ⓘ
surface form:
Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
|
| concernsConstitutionalProvision | Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ |
| concernsLegalConcept |
eminent domain
ⓘ
just compensation ⓘ public use ⓘ |
| criticizedFor | allowing transfer of property from less powerful owners to more powerful private interests ⓘ |
| decisionSplit | 5-4 ⓘ |
| expandedInterpretationOf | public use under the Takings Clause ⓘ |
| hasCitation | 545 U.S. 469 ⓘ |
| hasCountry |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| hasCourt | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| hasDecisionDate | 2005-06-23 ⓘ |
| hasDissentingJustices |
Antonin Scalia
ⓘ
Clarence Thomas ⓘ Sandra Day O’Connor ⓘ William H. Rehnquist ⓘ
surface form:
William Rehnquist
|
| hasDissentingOpinionBy |
Clarence Thomas
ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Clarence Thomas
Sandra Day O’Connor ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Sandra Day O’Connor
|
| hasDocketNumber | No. 04-108 ⓘ |
| hasMajorityJustices |
Anthony M. Kennedy
ⓘ
surface form:
Anthony Kennedy
David H. Souter ⓘ
surface form:
David Souter
John Paul Stevens ⓘ Ruth Bader Ginsburg ⓘ Stephen G. Breyer ⓘ
surface form:
Stephen Breyer
|
| hasMajorityOpinionBy |
John Paul Stevens
ⓘ
surface form:
Justice John Paul Stevens
|
| hasPetitioner | Susette Kelo ⓘ |
| hasRespondent |
New London, Connecticut
ⓘ
surface form:
City of New London, Connecticut
|
| hasYear | 2005 ⓘ |
| heldThat |
economic development can qualify as a public use under the Takings Clause
ⓘ
government may take private property and transfer it to another private party for economic development if part of a comprehensive plan ⓘ |
| involvesPropertyLocation |
Fort Trumbull State Park
ⓘ
surface form:
Fort Trumbull neighborhood, New London, Connecticut
|
| involvesTakingOf | privately owned homes ⓘ |
| isTaughtIn |
U.S. constitutional law courses
ⓘ
property law courses ⓘ |
| purposeOfTaking |
economic development
ⓘ
increased tax revenue ⓘ job creation ⓘ |
| relatesToProject | New London economic development plan associated with a nearby Pfizer facility ⓘ |
| resultedIn | upholding the City of New London’s use of eminent domain ⓘ |
| supportsView | courts should defer to legislative judgments about public purpose in takings ⓘ |
| triggeredResponse |
legislative reforms in many U.S. states limiting eminent domain for economic development
ⓘ
widespread public controversy ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Kelo v. City of New London Description of subject: Kelo v. City of New London is a landmark 2005 U.S. Supreme Court case that expanded the interpretation of “public use” under the Takings Clause to allow government seizure of private property for economic development projects.
Referenced by (1)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
→
influencedDecision
→
Kelo v. City of New London
ⓘ