107 Iowa L. Rev. 2433 (2022)

Download PDF

Abstract

The landmark case of Kelo v. City of New London in 2005 sparked public outrage. Following the case, legislators, legal scholars, and activists hounded the courts, academics, and public with endless opinions and critiques of the decision. State legislatures subsequently took the matter into their owns hands, drafting statutes and revisiting existing ones to combat the fear of government overreach that Kelo generated. States’ differing responses generated problematic inconsistencies, specifically as technology propels large-scale, multi-state infrastructure and energy projects. Eminent domain law should carefully balance the interests of private landowners and the public’s interests, but the current inconsistency between states is inefficient and harming them both. This Note emphasizes the increasing need for a more coherent system of eminent domain law throughout the United States regarding large-scale energy infrastructure. Instead of proposing an additional federal agency to oversee the administration and regulation of large projects requiring the use of eminent domain, this Note argues that Iowa’s statutory framework and recently established jurisprudence through Puntenney v. Iowa Utilities Board offers a solution that other states should adopt.