In an otherwise balanced story yesterday on conservative and libertarian efforts to limit a 2005 Supreme Court ruling expanding eminent domain, USA Today reporter Martin Kasindorf concluded his story with a swipe at anti-Kelo v.
"The property rights advocates have exploited Kelo to advance a broader anti-government agenda," Kasindorf quoted "John Echeverria of
Actually, Echeverria is head of the Georgetown Environmental Law & Policy Institute, and his bias in favor of Kelo and work with the liberal Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), went unmentioned. In doing so, the reader is left with the impression Echeverria is a dispassionate legal observer, or at least one uninvolved in Kelo-related controversies.
Yet on November 4, 2005, Echeverria told New York state legislators, "I firmly believe the U.S. Supreme Court decision" in Kelo v. New London "was correctly decided."
"Generally speaking, I believe the courts are often subject to unfair and misguided criticism by various interests groups and by certain elected officials, and the reaction to Kelo fits that unfortunate pattern," argued Echeverria, who went on to describe Kelo as "a model of judicial restraint."
Aside from his read of the case law, Echeverria cited the liberal Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) in his testimony as a group that joined him in offering "recommendations on how to approach legislative reform on eminent domain issues."
A search of the Federal Election Commission’s campaign donor database shows Echeverria contributed $1,000 in 1999 to liberal former Sen. Bill Bradley’s (D-N.J.) 2000 presidential campaign and $2,000 in 2003 to liberal former Gov. Howard Dean’s (D-Vt.) 2004 presidential run.
