Property rights advocates lost three cases in the last Supreme Court term. The problem is, in each of the three cases the Court reached the proper legal result as I explain in this NRO column. This is even true in the Kelo eminent domain case. I am no fan of eminent domain, but that does not make its use for economic development unconstitutional. The originalist case for a robust limitation on the purposes for which eminent domain is used is surprisingly weak, so the result in Kelo was probably correct. (And I know I'm going to catch hell from my libertarian friends for that one!)

Of somewhat related interest, I address the non-scandal of privately funded conferences for judges, including those sponsored by FREE, here.