The Supreme Court said on Friday that it would not consider an appeal by a Chicago landowner whose land was taken through eminent domain and given to a chocolate-making company.

Fred Eychaner took issue with the high court's 2005 Kelo v. New London decision, which said that local governments have the ability to take away private property for economic development use. Eychaner had asked the court to overturn the ruling or cut back on its reach, according to Bloomberg.

Eychaner owned a piece of land located in the River West neighborhood, which the city of Chicago tried to buy from him. When he denied the offer, the city subsequently gave it to Blommer Chocolate company, saying that it could become a blighted area in the future, and Eychaner sued the city.


Though he was eventually awarded $7.1 million in compensation, Eychaner said Chicago lacked the authority to seize the land at all.

Three justices — Brett KavanaughBrett Michael KavanaughGOP infighting takes stupid to a whole new level What's that you smell in the Supreme Court? The Hill's Morning Report - Presented by Facebook - Biden talks up bright side beneath omicron's cloud MORE, Clarence ThomasClarence ThomasRoberts and Roe: The Supreme Court considers a narrow question on abortion Five revealing quotes from Supreme Court abortion case  How religious liberty was distorted in the age of COVID-19 MORE and Neil GorsuchNeil GorsuchWhat's that you smell in the Supreme Court? The Memo: Trump's justices look set to restrict abortion Five revealing quotes from Supreme Court abortion case  MORE — said the Supreme Court should have heard the case, one shy of the four needed to take up Eychaner's appeal. Thomas, who was also writing for Gorsuch, cited that the 2005 ruling was a “mistake.”

“Failure to step in today not only deserves the Constitution and our precedent, but also leaves in place a legal regime that benefits ‘those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms,’” they said in their opinion.