Keystone: Environmentalists Suddenly Rediscover Property Rights
1st March 2014
Beyond that, we should enjoy the irony of environmentalists suddenly discovering property rights after cheering on every erosion of property rights in favor of unlimited government regulatory power for decades. In fact Steyer will lose his legal challenges because of precedents over 100 years old for projects like Keystone—the same precedents that determined the outcome of the now-infamous Kelo case in 2004. See, for example, Strickley v. Highland Boy Gold Mining Company from 1906, or Dayton Minnig v. Sewall, a Nevada Supreme Court case from around the same time. Both held that it was in fact okay to take private property from A to give to B if B’s private enterprise had some kind of public benefit. Not to mention Berman v. Parker in 1954, which argued that private property could be taken because “The concept of the public welfare is broad and inclusive.” Well, that’s nice. (See also the 1981 Michigan case, Poletown Neighborhood Council v. City of Detroit.)