Testing O'Connor and Thomas: Does the Use of Eminent Domain Target Poor and Minority Communities?
In dissenting from the US Supreme Court's 2005 Kelo decision upholding the use of eminent domain for private-to-private transfers of property, Justices O'Connor and Thomas asserted, based on the history of urban renewal, that eminent domain for private development would disproportionately...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Urban studies (Edinburgh, Scotland) Scotland), 2009-10, Vol.46 (11), p.2447-2461 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 2461 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 11 |
| container_start_page | 2447 |
| container_title | Urban studies (Edinburgh, Scotland) |
| container_volume | 46 |
| creator | Carpenter, Dick M. Ross, John K. |
| description | In dissenting from the US Supreme Court's 2005 Kelo decision upholding the use of eminent domain for private-to-private transfers of property, Justices O'Connor and Thomas asserted, based on the history of urban renewal, that eminent domain for private development would disproportionately hurt poor and minority communities. This study uses US census data and a sample of redevelopment project areas using or identified for the use of eminent domain to test the assertions of Justices O'Connor and Thomas. Results reveal that such project areas are, in fact, disproportionately populated by those who are poor, minority and less educated. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1177/0042098009342597 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_58828672</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>43198484</jstor_id><sage_id>10.1177_0042098009342597</sage_id><sourcerecordid>43198484</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c457t-54a44030bbcfbd67c4489bd23c9ef9f50faf11acf1a49810f55d5f347fec6e953</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc1LAzEQxYMoWKt3L0JAUC-rk69N4kWkfkJFDxW8Lek2qSndRJPtwf_erRURQT0NzPzeGx4PoV0Cx4RIeQLAKWgFoBmnQss11COshAJK9rSOestzsbxvoq2cZwBQUi16yIxsbn2Y4vvDQQwhJmzCBI-eY2PyKb6INuP22eLHbHF0-LLxwYa22zfGBzwyaWpb_BA_ZXe-M_DtGx7EplkE33qbz7bRhjPzbHc-Zx89Xl2OBjfF8P76dnA-LGouZFsIbjgHBuNx7caTUtacKz2eUFZr67QT4IwjxNSOGK4VASfERDjGpbN1abVgfXSw8n1J8XXRpaoan2s7n5tg4yJXQimqSkn_BSmhilKpOvDoT5AoJoDKUpAO3f-BzuIihS5vRTRVjCv28RlWVJ1izsm66iX5xqS3ikC1bLH62WInKVaSbKb2m-nv_N6Kn-U2pi9_zohWXHH2Dne-pAo</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1928348372</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Testing O'Connor and Thomas: Does the Use of Eminent Domain Target Poor and Minority Communities?</title><source>Access via SAGE</source><source>PAIS Index</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><creator>Carpenter, Dick M. ; Ross, John K.</creator><creatorcontrib>Carpenter, Dick M. ; Ross, John K.</creatorcontrib><description>In dissenting from the US Supreme Court's 2005 Kelo decision upholding the use of eminent domain for private-to-private transfers of property, Justices O'Connor and Thomas asserted, based on the history of urban renewal, that eminent domain for private development would disproportionately hurt poor and minority communities. This study uses US census data and a sample of redevelopment project areas using or identified for the use of eminent domain to test the assertions of Justices O'Connor and Thomas. Results reveal that such project areas are, in fact, disproportionately populated by those who are poor, minority and less educated.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0042-0980</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1360-063X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0042098009342597</identifier><identifier>CODEN: URBSAQ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London, England: Routledge Journal, Taylor & Francis Ltd</publisher><subject>Census ; Censuses ; Cities ; Communities ; Eminent domain ; Gentrification ; Low income groups ; Metropolitan areas ; Minorities ; Minority & ethnic groups ; Minority groups ; Neighborhoods ; O Connor, Sandra Day ; Poverty ; Private property ; Property ; Public property ; Public use ; Reclamation of land ; Redevelopment ; Redevelopment, Urban ; Renewal ; Right of property ; Studies ; Supreme Court decisions ; Supreme courts ; Thomas, Clarence ; United States ; United States Supreme court ; Urban areas ; Urban poverty ; Urban renewal ; Urban studies</subject><ispartof>Urban studies (Edinburgh, Scotland), 2009-10, Vol.46 (11), p.2447-2461</ispartof><rights>Copyright Sage Publications Ltd. Oct 2009</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c457t-54a44030bbcfbd67c4489bd23c9ef9f50faf11acf1a49810f55d5f347fec6e953</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c457t-54a44030bbcfbd67c4489bd23c9ef9f50faf11acf1a49810f55d5f347fec6e953</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/43198484$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/43198484$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,21819,27865,27866,27924,27925,33774,43621,43622,58017,58250</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Carpenter, Dick M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ross, John K.</creatorcontrib><title>Testing O'Connor and Thomas: Does the Use of Eminent Domain Target Poor and Minority Communities?</title><title>Urban studies (Edinburgh, Scotland)</title><description>In dissenting from the US Supreme Court's 2005 Kelo decision upholding the use of eminent domain for private-to-private transfers of property, Justices O'Connor and Thomas asserted, based on the history of urban renewal, that eminent domain for private development would disproportionately hurt poor and minority communities. This study uses US census data and a sample of redevelopment project areas using or identified for the use of eminent domain to test the assertions of Justices O'Connor and Thomas. Results reveal that such project areas are, in fact, disproportionately populated by those who are poor, minority and less educated.</description><subject>Census</subject><subject>Censuses</subject><subject>Cities</subject><subject>Communities</subject><subject>Eminent domain</subject><subject>Gentrification</subject><subject>Low income groups</subject><subject>Metropolitan areas</subject><subject>Minorities</subject><subject>Minority & ethnic groups</subject><subject>Minority groups</subject><subject>Neighborhoods</subject><subject>O Connor, Sandra Day</subject><subject>Poverty</subject><subject>Private property</subject><subject>Property</subject><subject>Public property</subject><subject>Public use</subject><subject>Reclamation of land</subject><subject>Redevelopment</subject><subject>Redevelopment, Urban</subject><subject>Renewal</subject><subject>Right of property</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Supreme Court decisions</subject><subject>Supreme courts</subject><subject>Thomas, Clarence</subject><subject>United States</subject><subject>United States Supreme court</subject><subject>Urban areas</subject><subject>Urban poverty</subject><subject>Urban renewal</subject><subject>Urban studies</subject><issn>0042-0980</issn><issn>1360-063X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkc1LAzEQxYMoWKt3L0JAUC-rk69N4kWkfkJFDxW8Lek2qSndRJPtwf_erRURQT0NzPzeGx4PoV0Cx4RIeQLAKWgFoBmnQss11COshAJK9rSOestzsbxvoq2cZwBQUi16yIxsbn2Y4vvDQQwhJmzCBI-eY2PyKb6INuP22eLHbHF0-LLxwYa22zfGBzwyaWpb_BA_ZXe-M_DtGx7EplkE33qbz7bRhjPzbHc-Zx89Xl2OBjfF8P76dnA-LGouZFsIbjgHBuNx7caTUtacKz2eUFZr67QT4IwjxNSOGK4VASfERDjGpbN1abVgfXSw8n1J8XXRpaoan2s7n5tg4yJXQimqSkn_BSmhilKpOvDoT5AoJoDKUpAO3f-BzuIihS5vRTRVjCv28RlWVJ1izsm66iX5xqS3ikC1bLH62WInKVaSbKb2m-nv_N6Kn-U2pi9_zohWXHH2Dne-pAo</recordid><startdate>20091001</startdate><enddate>20091001</enddate><creator>Carpenter, Dick M.</creator><creator>Ross, John K.</creator><general>Routledge Journal, Taylor & Francis Ltd</general><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Sage Publications Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>WZK</scope><scope>SOI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20091001</creationdate><title>Testing O'Connor and Thomas: Does the Use of Eminent Domain Target Poor and Minority Communities?</title><author>Carpenter, Dick M. ; Ross, John K.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c457t-54a44030bbcfbd67c4489bd23c9ef9f50faf11acf1a49810f55d5f347fec6e953</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Census</topic><topic>Censuses</topic><topic>Cities</topic><topic>Communities</topic><topic>Eminent domain</topic><topic>Gentrification</topic><topic>Low income groups</topic><topic>Metropolitan areas</topic><topic>Minorities</topic><topic>Minority & ethnic groups</topic><topic>Minority groups</topic><topic>Neighborhoods</topic><topic>O Connor, Sandra Day</topic><topic>Poverty</topic><topic>Private property</topic><topic>Property</topic><topic>Public property</topic><topic>Public use</topic><topic>Reclamation of land</topic><topic>Redevelopment</topic><topic>Redevelopment, Urban</topic><topic>Renewal</topic><topic>Right of property</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Supreme Court decisions</topic><topic>Supreme courts</topic><topic>Thomas, Clarence</topic><topic>United States</topic><topic>United States Supreme court</topic><topic>Urban areas</topic><topic>Urban poverty</topic><topic>Urban renewal</topic><topic>Urban studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Carpenter, Dick M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ross, John K.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Urban studies (Edinburgh, Scotland)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Carpenter, Dick M.</au><au>Ross, John K.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Testing O'Connor and Thomas: Does the Use of Eminent Domain Target Poor and Minority Communities?</atitle><jtitle>Urban studies (Edinburgh, Scotland)</jtitle><date>2009-10-01</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>46</volume><issue>11</issue><spage>2447</spage><epage>2461</epage><pages>2447-2461</pages><issn>0042-0980</issn><eissn>1360-063X</eissn><coden>URBSAQ</coden><abstract>In dissenting from the US Supreme Court's 2005 Kelo decision upholding the use of eminent domain for private-to-private transfers of property, Justices O'Connor and Thomas asserted, based on the history of urban renewal, that eminent domain for private development would disproportionately hurt poor and minority communities. This study uses US census data and a sample of redevelopment project areas using or identified for the use of eminent domain to test the assertions of Justices O'Connor and Thomas. Results reveal that such project areas are, in fact, disproportionately populated by those who are poor, minority and less educated.</abstract><cop>London, England</cop><pub>Routledge Journal, Taylor & Francis Ltd</pub><doi>10.1177/0042098009342597</doi><tpages>15</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0042-0980 |
| ispartof | Urban studies (Edinburgh, Scotland), 2009-10, Vol.46 (11), p.2447-2461 |
| issn | 0042-0980 1360-063X |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_58828672 |
| source | Access via SAGE; PAIS Index; Sociological Abstracts; JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing |
| subjects | Census Censuses Cities Communities Eminent domain Gentrification Low income groups Metropolitan areas Minorities Minority & ethnic groups Minority groups Neighborhoods O Connor, Sandra Day Poverty Private property Property Public property Public use Reclamation of land Redevelopment Redevelopment, Urban Renewal Right of property Studies Supreme Court decisions Supreme courts Thomas, Clarence United States United States Supreme court Urban areas Urban poverty Urban renewal Urban studies |
| title | Testing O'Connor and Thomas: Does the Use of Eminent Domain Target Poor and Minority Communities? |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T01%3A48%3A36IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Testing%20O'Connor%20and%20Thomas:%20Does%20the%20Use%20of%20Eminent%20Domain%20Target%20Poor%20and%20Minority%20Communities?&rft.jtitle=Urban%20studies%20(Edinburgh,%20Scotland)&rft.au=Carpenter,%20Dick%20M.&rft.date=2009-10-01&rft.volume=46&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=2447&rft.epage=2461&rft.pages=2447-2461&rft.issn=0042-0980&rft.eissn=1360-063X&rft.coden=URBSAQ&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0042098009342597&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E43198484%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1928348372&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=43198484&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0042098009342597&rfr_iscdi=true |