The truth behind the eminent domain case now before the U.S. Supreme Court

http://www.CottageCoalition.org ^ | Cottage Coalition

[Cottage Coalition]

The U.S. Supreme Court recently heard arguments in Kelo v. New London, the Connecticut eminent domain case which will determine how this ultimate government power is used for generations. The truth has been obscured in this and almost every other case of eminent domain seizure for "economic benefit."

So many of the facts in this and similar cases have been obscured and misrepresented that a new web site has been created dedicated to countering this propaganda.  Use it as a resource to obtain the truth.

Learn the facts here:  http://www.CottageCoalition.org

You will learn:

• New London is not a city in economic distress. Its current unemployment rate is BELOW the national average.
• How the city's attorneys lied in their Supreme Court brief, exaggerating the neighborhood's and city's economic condition.
• How the city's attorney lied on the Supreme Court steps, grossly exaggerating the number of jobs lost by the closing of a Navy facility.
• Pfizer was behind this project from its inception. A 2002 front-page article in the Wall St. Journal explored this in depth.
• The Connecticut Supreme Court's decision subsequently fully corroborated that the project was done to accommodate Pfizer.
• The blistering Connecticut Supreme Court dissent, pointing out the economic impossibility of the proposed plan.
• The project did not originate at the local level, but was initiated and run by the corrupt Rowland administration.
• How Newark, NJ's totally crooked city council is seizing an entire neighborhood on behalf of a convicted cocaine distributor.
• How a massive Camden, NJ waterfront minority neighborhood is being sold down the Delaware River by political power brokers.
• What the original intent of the framers actually was regarding eminent domain.
• How and why economic benefit seizures always involve wealthy, politically-connected parties conspiring with politicians to steal the property of those without political clout.
• Why eminent domain seizures for economic development actually increase during good economic times, refuting the claim that municipalities only use this weapon when their economies are depressed.

http://www.CottageCoalition.org

[MAEsser]

My thoughts are that Rehnquist has braved the chemotheraphy front specifically to hear this case.He's had a particular interest in eminent domain cases. Additionally, the jurisprudence trend has favored individuals and has narrowed what's an acceptable "public use."

My prediction: 5-4 for Kelo.

[satchmodog9]

The American people have become the Chinese man in Tieneman Square standing in front of the tank. The Supreme Court are the treads of that tank and they will run us over when this case passes through their evil little fingers. I have no confidence in them doing the right thing.

[A Jovial Cad]

Excellent resource! Thanks for posting it. I have been both fascinated and appalled by this case from the very beginning, as well as several other property-rights cases in the news lately.

Again, thanks.

[Mears]

I hope you're right,in fact I hope the vote is higher for Kelo.

This situation frightens me to death.

[Phantom Lord]

Liberty, freedom, and individual rights can not survive the destruction of private property rights.

If the court rules against Kelo, we are truly in trouble.

[Stellar Dendrite]

Abolition of private property, a Commie goal...

[biff]

I hope a decision for Kelo will ulitmately put a stop to our governor here in Texas and his idiotic, insane, immoral 184 billion $ TTC nightmare.

[Tench_Coxe]

"The American people have become the Chinese man in Tieneman Square standing in front of the tank. The Supreme Court are the treads of that tank and they will run us over when this case passes through their evil little fingers. I have no confidence in them doing the right thing."

Given the recent performance on this subject among others, and if what you say is true, at some point the guns are gonna come out.

[hispanichoosier]

Thanks for the post! I don't think the framers of the constitution would have even thought that government would be taking private property for the purpose of turning that property over to another private entity. The only "public purposes" the framers would have had in mind were roads, public buildings, military outposts, etc.

[GOPJ]

eminent domain = legal theft

[GOPJ]

Ding ding ding. We have a winner!

Thanks for the post! I don't think the framers of the constitution would have even thought that government would be taking private property for the purpose of turning that property over to another private entity. The only "public purposes" the framers would have had in mind were roads, public buildings, military outposts, etc.

[hillary's_fat_a**]

The only "public purposes" the framers would have had in mind were roads, public buildings, military outposts, etc.

Yea, but isn't the Constitution a living and breathing document that changes with the times? /sarcasm

[hispanichoosier]

LOL! No, in the words of Justice Scalia, it's a "dead document." :)