Saturday, November 10, 2007
The D.C. Court of appeals recently held that a property owner can challenge a taking based on a blight designation as pretextual. I've had some e-mail discussion with some folks about the case (Franco v. National Capital Revitalization Corp, 930 A.2d 160 (D.C. 2007)) and whether this type of challenge is the kind of claim of pretext that the Kelo majority expressly contemplated or whether it is an end-run around Kelo. I'm waffling, and need to think about it more, but wanted to note the decision. Another interesting issue, which I also need to think about more, is whether this creates a split with the Second Circuit's recent Didden decision.
UPDATE: Ilya Somin at the VC has a very thoughtful post on this case. Ilya is more up on this issue than anyone I know. Check it out.
[Comments are held for approval, so there will be some delay in posting]