Oral Argument and Court's Opinion in Philadelphia v. Ted's Pizza

On Monday, Feb. 14th, 2011, at 11:47 AM, the UCHS Supreme Court heard oral argument in the case of Philadelphia v. Ted's Pizza.  For the city of Philadelphia, which sought to use the power of eminent domain under the 5th amendment to build a new stadium, Counselor Martin M. made a passionate opening argument.  For Ted's Pizza, which insists that a new stadium will harm the community and is not a public purpose, Counselor Tysheema M. pitched in to make a very clear, persuasive argument.  Counselors Jason W., Diamond B., and Matthew B. made fierce rebuttals for Philadelphia, as Randall M., Cierra J., and Miya G. did for Ted's Pizza.

In the end, the Supreme Court ruled, 4-0, that the 5th amendment did not allow the city to construct a stadium.  A written opinion of the Court is forthcoming.