Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court Expands Power of Eminent Domain
Chicago Tribune ^ | June 23, 2005 | David G. Savage

Posted on 06/23/2005 3:26:27 PM PDT by Still Thinking

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court gave local governments broad power today to bulldoze homes and other private property to make way for business development, a ruling that could encourage more city-backed plans to replace small stores with big-box retailers.

The 5-4 ruling upheld a plan by officials in a coastal Connecticut town to condemn nine homes of longtime residents that would be replaced with an office complex and a marina.

The dispute between the homeowners and the city officials became a classic test of government power versus individual rights. It pitted a community's hopes for economic rebirth against an individual's right to keep one's home.

Economic development emerged as the clear winner.

The high court's opinion goes further than before in allowing the government to invoke its "eminent domain" and to seize private property from unwilling sellers.

The Constitution says government may take private property "for public use" if it pays the owners "just compensation." Originally, public use meant the land was used for roads, canals or military bases. In the 19th century, railroads were permitted to take private lands because they served the public.


In the mid-20th century, the court said officials could condemn homes and stores in "blighted" areas as part of a redevelopment plan. That 1954 decision helped trigger various urban renewal projects across the nation.

In today's decision, the court went a step further and said officials need not claim they were condemning blighted properties or clearing slums. Now, as long as officials hope to create jobs or raise tax collections, they can seize the homes of unwilling sellers, the court said. This "public purpose" is a "public use" of the land, the court said in Kelo vs. New London.

(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; US: Connecticut
KEYWORDS: costco; domain; eminent; eminentdomain; kelo; landgrab; scotus; tyranny; tyrrany; walmart
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-50 next last
"The justices said they were unwilling to "second guess" local officials on what is best for their communities."

But they have no problem second guessing the knowledge of the employers of the local government drones, namely the homeowners. Typical. Well, there goes whatever was left of the "American Dream". I'm so ashamed of SCOTUS I'm literally sick to my stomach.

1 posted on 06/23/2005 3:26:27 PM PDT by Still Thinking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

If your property taxes aren't high enough, some developer could make a case to the mayor that he could put a strip mall through your bedroom for more tax revenue and he would win. What a revoltin toin of events.


2 posted on 06/23/2005 3:29:43 PM PDT by Thebaddog (Dawgs off the coffee table.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

Write your elected Representatives: Following is what I wrote mine:

Again five black robed tyrants have violated the Constitution of the United States by making an amendment to the document and dictating law that they have no power to do.

The taking of property for private use is not in the Constitution and the Supreme Court has not authority to dictate a law that allows this unlawful practice to take place.

The Congress has the power to impeach judges and the power to limit what the court can do.

When will you take back our freedom from these black robed anti-American dictators?

Or is it time to say that the Republic has been taken over by black robed tyrants. If so, then Congress should close as there is not longer any need for you to play act as if you were doing something.


3 posted on 06/23/2005 3:34:12 PM PDT by YOUGOTIT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
We need men like these.....


New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

Massachusetts: John Hancock, Samual Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Connecticut: Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York: William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey: Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Pennsylvania: Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Delaware: Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean

Maryland: Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia: George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina: William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina: Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton

Georgia: Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton
4 posted on 06/23/2005 3:34:29 PM PDT by OSHA (I,ll be breaf.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

this is one of the worst rulings ever


5 posted on 06/23/2005 3:34:39 PM PDT by atlanta67
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
The five 'justices' who decided that the government can take your home away from you whenever it decides it wants to:

For the record.

6 posted on 06/23/2005 3:35:08 PM PDT by snarks_when_bored
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
Eminent domain now means condemning private property to enhance tax revenues. Liberals love this!

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
7 posted on 06/23/2005 3:35:36 PM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
Shouldn't this be handled by the States?

Why is this a Federal issue?

8 posted on 06/23/2005 3:36:54 PM PDT by Doe Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

Hope that some developer wants to put a bunch of condos on the property of the homes that the five justices live in. Since the city or county will determine the value it will be well under market value. Take their homes and make condos or strip malls I am sure that they are not paying the amount of taxes that would be collected if there were a retail space on the property.


9 posted on 06/23/2005 3:37:13 PM PDT by YOUGOTIT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
This decision has made me sick to my stomach also. Why would anybody want to be a home owner if your local government could now bull doze it for any cockamamie excuse!
10 posted on 06/23/2005 3:37:16 PM PDT by tob2 (Old Fossil and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
And three of the five in the majority (Stevens, Souter and Kennedy) are Republican appointees. Hell of a lot of good THEY did us.

When/if Bush gets to a chance to appoint a justice to the Supreme Court, he better be willing to stand up to the firestorm and pick a Constitutional conservative.

I'm disgusted beyond words.

11 posted on 06/23/2005 3:39:35 PM PDT by Texan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

I reversed my flag to fly upside down when I read the ruling. My ship of state is in distress. If all the property owners out there did the same, i would be a demonstration that would NOT go unnoticed.


12 posted on 06/23/2005 3:44:36 PM PDT by Roccus (Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

The FR poll on this doesn't have a strong enough selection for this evil, comtemptable, vile, disgusting, situation!

"...is it time yet...?"

Top sends!


13 posted on 06/23/2005 3:47:18 PM PDT by petro45acp (SUPPORT/BE YOUR LOCAL SHEEPDOG!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: YOUGOTIT

Bravo!

Would you mind if I copied parts of your message to send to my reps also?


14 posted on 06/23/2005 3:50:05 PM PDT by Strutt9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Strutt9

No problem use all or some


15 posted on 06/23/2005 3:51:00 PM PDT by YOUGOTIT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: snarks_when_bored

Thanks for the record. We need to keep this five in mind when the revolution comes.


16 posted on 06/23/2005 3:51:49 PM PDT by Vigilanteman (crime would drop like a sprung trapdoor if we brought back good old-fashioned hangings)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: YOUGOTIT; Lazamataz

Or is it time to say that the Republic has been taken over by black robed tyrants



don't JUST blame the supremes.
blame the local ELECTED governmental bureaucrats who wanted to do this in the first place.

Until we are rid of these kinds of folks, from public office, we will have nothing but continual and further erosion of our nation. The thing is, these people keep getting elected. WE put them there, and give countenance to their 'benevolent' efforts to 'improve' our 'communities'.

the common good, common sense, community and all the 'comm' words are rooted in the concept of communism... all things held in common, for the common good. Most often the term is bandied about with 'for the good of the children, to preserve THEIR future' for added impetus to submit.


17 posted on 06/23/2005 3:54:40 PM PDT by Robert_Paulson2 (I remember when conservative meant, CUTTING the government's POWER and SIZE down.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Roccus

Maybe not unnoticed, but probably ignored.


18 posted on 06/23/2005 3:56:23 PM PDT by Still Thinking (Disregard the law of unintended consequences at your own risk.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: YOUGOTIT

Thank you!!!!!!!!!!


19 posted on 06/23/2005 3:56:30 PM PDT by Strutt9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: petro45acp

Yeah, I know, I wanted a much stronger option as well. "Hell, NO!" just didn't seem to cut it.


20 posted on 06/23/2005 3:57:21 PM PDT by Still Thinking (Disregard the law of unintended consequences at your own risk.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-50 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson