Skip to main content
HRES 340 109th Congress House Law Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues Congress Constitutional amendments Constitutional law Eminent domain Government Operations and Politics Landowners Legislation Public Lands and Natural Resources Right of property Supreme Court decisions

Expressing the grave disapproval of the House of Representatives regarding the majority opinion of the Supreme Court in the case of Kelo et al. v. City of New London et al. that nullifies the protections afforded private property owners in the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

Introduced: June 24, 2005 See on congress.gov
 Everywhere this bill has been 12 steps
Introduced
In committee
Reported out
Passed House
Passed Senate
To President
Became law
Jun 30, 2005
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Jun 30, 2005
On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 365 - 33, 18 Present (Roll no. 361). (text as passed House: CR H5577)
Jun 30, 2005
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 365 - 33, 18 Present (Roll no. 361).(text as passed House: CR H5577)
Jun 30, 2005
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H5592-5593)
Jun 30, 2005
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
Jun 30, 2005
FURTHER DEBATE - By unanimous consent, the House proceeded with an additional 12 minutes of debate to be equally divided and controlled.
Jun 30, 2005
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H. Res. 340.
Jun 30, 2005
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5577-5585)
Jun 30, 2005
Mr. Sensenbrenner moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution.
Jun 29, 2005
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H5370)
Jun 24, 2005
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Jun 24, 2005
Introduced in House
 Votes taken on this bill 1
DateChamberWhat was voted onResultYes–No
Jul 1, 2005 House · vote #361 On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree Passed 36533 See who voted →
 Plain-English summary Congressional Research Service

(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)

Expresses disagreement with the majority opinion in Kelo et al. v. City of New London et al. (Kelo) and its holdings that effectively negate the public use requirement of the takings clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that state and local governments: (1) should only execute the power of eminent domain for the public good; (2) must always justly compensate affected individuals in accordance with the Fifth Amendment; (3) should never use eminent domain to advantage one private party over another; and (4) should not construe Kelo as justification to abuse the power of eminent domain.

Reserves to Congress the right to address through legislation any abuses of eminent domain by state and local government in light of Kelo.

What's happening now June 30, 2005

Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.

 Committees of jurisdiction 1