I’m Gwen Outen with the VOA Special English Economics Report.

JUDGING A NEW JUSTICE - Conservative and liberal groups are ready for a fight once President Bush moves to fill an opening on the Supreme Court. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor announced on July first that she will retire after twenty-four terms, once a replacement is nominated and confirmed.

This is the first opening on the Supreme Court in eleven years. President Bush says he hopes to have a new justice confirmed by the Senate before the court returns in October.

Justice O'Connor was the first woman, and one of only two, ever to serve on the Supreme Court. President Ronald Reagan nominated her in July nineteen eighty-one. The seventy-five-year-old justice says she wants to spend more time with her family.

Her moderate opinions often placed her in the political center among the nine justices. Justice O'Connor often was the deciding fifth vote on social issues that divided the high court, like a woman's right to end unwanted pregnancies.

Her announced retirement surprised many people. The Supreme Court term ended on June twenty-seventh without any announcement on the future of Chief Justice William Rehnquist, who has thyroid cancer.

On June twenty-third, the Supreme Court decided an important case about property rights in the United States.  The ruling will permit local governments to take private property for economic development.  This is how the case developed:

In nineteen ninety-eight, officials in New London, Connecticut, announced plans to redevelop an area of the city.  Soon, the drug company Pfizer decided to place a research center in New London.  This was good news for a city with years of economic difficulties.

In two thousand, officials expanded the economic development plan to include property along a river.  They said the project would create more than one thousand jobs.

But the project needed land.  The city of New London was able to buy about one hundred properties in the development area.  However, nine people who owned fifteen properties refused to sell.  The city said it would take the properties under eminent domain. 

Eminent domain is a power that governments have to seize property in some cases. 

The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution permits governments to take private property for "public use," if there is fair payment. 

State courts in Connecticut ruled that the city could take the homes.  The owners appealed to the United States Supreme Court.  They argued that the project did not represent a "public use."  Private companies would develop the office space and other buildings proposed.

The case divided the court.  Four justices supported the owners.  However, the other five supported the city.  The majority ruled that the city could use eminent domain to take the properties after paying a fair price.

Justice John Paul Stevens wrote the majority opinion.  He noted that governments may take land for public projects like roads.  Justice Stevens said projects that help a community grow economically also serve a public purpose. 

However, he said that states could restrict the use of eminent domain if they choose.

In a dissent, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor argued that governments now could take land simply by claiming it for economic development.  She said any private property could be given to another private owner, so long as it might be improved.

This VOA Special English Economics Report was written by Mario Ritter.  Our reports are online at voaspecialenglish.com.  I'm Gwen Outen.