Posted on 11/16/2017 7:29:27 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
HOUSTON — The party game Cards Against Humanity says it's bought U.S.-Mexico border land and hired a lawyer to try to stop President Donald Trump's proposed border wall.
A promotion called "Cards Against Humanity Saves America" offered 150,000 subscribers to its game a map of the land and a "certificate of our promise to fight the wall."
To build sections of the existing border fence, the U.S. government took hundreds of private landowners in Texas to court. A wall will likely require new lawsuits....
(Excerpt) Read more at cnews.canoe.com ...
I believe the land they bought is in an area that is remote and wouldn’t have a wall anyway. A worthless publicity stunt.
Cards Against Humanity Saves America...for future destruction and demise.
Prosecute treason.
So now Eminent Domain means nothing? Even after Kelo v. City of New London?
Homeland security will go through them like crap through a goose. Waivers have or will be signed.
More direct on that is how are they going to explain the R/W notation with the dashed lines on the survey plot?
I don't the government would even after to resort to Eminent Domain. An international border and a certain amount of land on either side is already, by law, considered a federal right of way and they can pretty much do anything they want without as much as even giving the property owner notice. There was a story after 9/11 about some folks on the Canadian border that learned this the hard way, they had owned land right on the border and essentially walked back and forth to Canada at will. They came home from work one day and a big border fence was now going down the middle of their backyard garden.
Just build the wall to put them on the Mexican side.
Better yet, wall the idiots to be on the Mexican side!
Even if it were, a better case for Emminent Domain I cannot think of.
Apparently the idiots have never heard of Eminent Domain.
It might be remote, but it would still serve as a magnet to a “gap” in the wall, an unauthorized entry point.
I am all for the project of building a half-mile wide sea level canal from Brownsville, Texas, to Chula Vista, California, following the existing US-Mexico boundary, and thus turning El Paso, Texas, into a major seaport, with a large turning basin and dock facilities.
But this shall await the development of large anti-gravity carrying barges, and dumping the spoil in the Gulf of Mexico, to form a large island suitable for development of massive resort facilities.
I thought that the land along the border was already set aside by the federal government, like a right of way.
Either way, the border is federally controlled. If these clowns plop a building down on the border, put that wall right through the middle of it.
Indeed, this “plan” is fitting of some college freshman sitting around a dorm lounge at 2:30am.
Leave it as a gateway and position BP there to pick up anyone who passes through. Sic the EPA on them with all sorts of fines when the land becomes a garbage dump.
Solution:
Build it with a turn slightly north of this property. Arc it back south, and continue on.
Easy peacey. Build the wall on the other side of such property; leaving that property on the Mexican side of it.
Even if they did somehow purchase land intending to disrupt building the wall, I'm pretty certain eminent domain would easily be used by the feds for national security reasons.
I think they should just build the wall around their property and put them on the Mexico side. Problem solved - everyone is happy.
Build the wall right around their land, then cede that parcel to Mexico :P
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.