Supreme Court Rules Cities May Seize Homes

Washington Post ^ | 6/23/05 | William Branigin

[scott7278]

It’s for the Public Good^TM

[frankiep]

I think we have past the point of no return. This country is going to explode from within sometime in the near future as things get worse and worse. Keep your powder dry.

[Republican Wildcat]

Opinion of the Court: Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Breyer, Ginsburg

Dissent: O'Connor, Scalia, Rehnquist, Thomas

[Jersey Republican Biker Chick]

"Dubya, we need some more conservative justices when the time comes. Don't let us down!"

You had better beg the Republicans in the Senate to help get the Conservatives onto the Bench. You know the libs are going to filibuster us to death.

[bobhoskins]

Increasing tax revenue is right there in the Constitution, isn't it? One of the foundational principles of the country? Lemme look, I'm sure it's gotta be in there somewhere.

I believe one of the reasons for the Revolutionary War was because the people thought they weren't being taxed quite enough.

[kittymyrib]

Thanks, Bush #41, for appointing that unmitigated disaster, Souter, because the Dems wanted someone with no paper trail. We can only pray that Bush #43 does a better job at picking SCOTUS justices than his father did.

[Republican Wildcat]

With the rulings as of late, Kennedy is drifting farther to the left, while O'Connor is back to her roots for the time being with the conservative wing of the Court.

[lowbridge]

Stevens added that "because that plan unquestionably serves a public purpose, the takings challenged here satisfy the public use requirement of the Fifth Amendment." He was joined in that view by justices Anthony Kennedy, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer.

Do you know soemthing? I think their homes are the perfect locations for brand new Wal-Marts.

[Alberta's Child]

Does this mean I can now sell crack out of my basement, since this would obviously provide a huge economic boost to the local economy?