Posted on 02/22/2005 5:18:12 AM PST by beaureguard
Boortz Ping!
If you want on or off the occasional Boortz Ping, FRmail me and let me know.
"This city is saying that a person's right to their property ends when the government figures out that that property in the hands of another private owner would generate more tax revenue."
This one sentence nails it. How is the greater good being served when basic rights are being compromised. This is abuse of power at the local level plain and simple. There needs to be a check & balance so one entity isn't making all of the decisions.
Boortz is awesome.
Having this case before the current court is a scary thing. Really scary.
Slippery slope doesn't begin to describe it....
May the high court have the wisdom to vote to stop this cruel abuse.
It is despicable this case has gotten this far. I hope like hell these people win & can keep their homes. That being said, If they lose, I hope my company gets the development contract.
What's the difference between these abuses and government imposed smoking bans? Socialism is as Fascism does!
If that is not clear, abuse will always be with us. It is very simple. The only thing necessary for an unjust society to exist is an endless supply of unjust and abusive bureaucrats.
Every society manages to have a reliable supply of them.
You really dont own property any more. The Government allows you to use it. I live in a place that is under what is called a critical area because of the Chesapeake Bay. I cant cut a tree on my own property without permission from the government and if they allow me to cut that one they can tell me how many I have to plant in order to make up for it. Not only that they tell me the size and type of trees they have to be. I cannot build a deck onto my house or add a toilet without permission. You call this property rights? No property rights are long gone, this is just another step in the wrong direction.
From your mouth to God's ear. And AMEN too!
My guess is Thomas and Scalia will do the right thing, but the rest are unpredictable. My guess is it will be a 5-4 decision, but not sure which way it will break.
Like they did with McCain/Feingold?
By the way, for anyone who's interested, the briefs are posted at http://www.abanet.org/publiced/preview/briefs/feb05.html#kelo
The Petitioners' brief is up, and the Respondent's brief should be up soon. It doesn't look like anyone has filed an amicus.
bump
The difference is that these abuses go one step beyond smoking bans. Smoking bans tell you what you cannot do on personal private property. In this case the government is trying to take away that private property. Not that I agree with either of them.
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.