Statement of Tom McClintock on SCOTUS Decision in Kelo (To introduce Constitutional Amendment)

Hon. Tom McClintock | June 23, 2005 | Hon. Tom McClintock

[calif_reaganite]

Senator Tom McClintock released the following statement on the United States Supreme Court decision in Kelo v. City of New London, Connecticut.

McClintock to introduce an amendment to the California Constitution to restore the original meaning of the property protections in the Bill of Rights

“Today the U.S. Supreme Court broke the social compact by striking down one of Americans’ most fundamental rights. Their decision nullifies the Constitution’s Public Use clause and opens an era when the rich and powerful may use government to seize the property of ordinary citizens for private gain.”

“The responsibility now falls on the various states to reassert and restore the property rights of their citizens. I am today announcing my intention to introduce an amendment to the California Constitution to restore the original meaning of the property protections in the Bill of Rights. This amendment will require that the government must either own the property it seizes through eminent domain or guarantee the public the legal right to use the property. In addition, it will require that such property must be restored to the original owner or his rightful successor, if the government ceased to use it for the purpose of the eminent domain action.”

###

[justshutupandtakeit]

John Marshall was never impeached.

Justice Chase was but not convicted. That is the only USSC justice who was impeached.

And it is not constitutional to impeach because of unpopular decisions. That is not what the Founders had in mind in fact it is the opposite.

[1Old Pro]

I agree that our legislators should act immdiately to creat a law to prevent this abuse.

[RedRightReturn]

I believe this actually occurred in Atlantic City, NJ during the Casino build-up...

[GaltMeister]

With respect, I think you are right, but just how will that ever happen? The ballot box? Has not done much good lately.

Agreed, that is the only way that it will happen - and it is unlikely. Most people will look at this ruling and go along with it to some extent, not realizong the true depth and meaning of the SC decision. As long as it dosen't affect them directly. Also, I realize that a good percentage of Americans these days do believe that 'the commom good' trumps an individuals rights. Just ask Hildebeast.

Our only option is to push conservative principles, and get people to vote for them. I think it has trended that way the past couple of decades, but I also think that a large portion of the Republican party is 'socialist lite', as a friend of mine says.

[george wythe]

"Sorry, but I don't support amending the US constitution every time the SCOTUS screws up."

I'm curious as to why

Because the US Constitution shouldn't be as long as the IRS Code.

The language in the US Constitution is clear and concise. Just because the SCOTUS purposely misreads the Constitution does not mean that the Constitution lacks another section.

What are going to do if the SCOTUS misreads the latest amendment?

[SoCal Pubbie]

So what you are saying is that five people rule the country, and I can't accept that. Simply wishing that the guys in the black robes do right is not enough. There are mechanisms for limiting judicial power. One is impeachment, another amendment. If we are to use neither then we are well and truly screwed.

[Aquinasfan]

The responsibility now falls on the various states to reassert and restore the property rights of their citizens.

Damn right. This is worth fighting over. Stealing the "wages" of the poor is one of the sins that cries out to heaven for justice.

Exodus 22:25-27

If you take your neighbor's cloak as a pledge, return it to him by sunset, because his cloak is the only covering he has for his body. What else will he sleep in? When he cries out to me, I will hear, for I am compassionate.

[george wythe]

What are going to do if the SCOTUS misreads the latest amendment?

I've never said to shut up and take it. All I'm saying is the amending the US Constitution is unnecessary and futile if we ignore the real problem.

IMHO, the issue is the SCOTUS justices and the SCOTUS scope. Congress needs to overhaul the SCOTUS, from confirming commonsense justices to restricting SCOTUS power.

[SoCal Pubbie]

All I can say is good luck with that.

[Bernard Marx]

Essentially, you're renting your property from the government presently.

True. If you want to find out who "really" owns your property, just quit paying property taxes. You'll get the answer in due course. This Supreme Court ruling is just one more proof that we are now subjects, owned and controlled lock stock and barrel by the government.

[Ghost of Philip Marlowe]

There is a good deal of this abuse at the federal level. The Nature Conservancy (with leftie Paul Newman as spokesman) have a deal worked out with the feds. They identify a chunk of private property, say a little old lady in VA. They approach the little old lady and say, "We know for a fact the feds are going to confiscate your home and land. If they do you'll only get 25% of the land's value. We'll give you 50%." The little old lady figures she better take what she can get. The NC buys the land then turns around and sells it to the federal government at 75%. They make a 25% profit on the sale. The feds have another chunk of land they add to the national parks/forests.

In short, the NC is having the taxpayers pay to confiscate land to turn over to the feds. The NC is a high-profit middle man.

[Bernard Marx]

we shoulda impeached Earl Warren before things got this out of hand!!! He started all this crappola!!!

Another brilliant Republican SCOTUS appointment, along with liberals Souter, Kennedy, Burger, Brennan, etc. It makes me wonder why I bother to vote.

[SierraWasp]

Oooooh! I like your tagline, Bernard!!!

Yes, Ike said it was probably his biggest single mistake to have elevated Earl Warren to Chief Justice! It seemed to him a good move at the time as Warren seemed to enjoy unprecedented popularity in CA, having been nominated by both the Democrats AND REPUBLICANS to run for Governor with NO opposition!!!

So we certainly have a precedent for the CAGOP swooning for the popular over the principled!!!

[justshutupandtakeit]

That is fraud. Fed purchases are at full market values.

Nature Conservatory should be taken to court in criminal actions for such fraud.

[k2blader]

McClintock bump. One of the few (R)'s I deeply respect.

[Ghost of Philip Marlowe]

They're working on it. NC has recently been called on the carpet by the congress.

That doesn't give the millions of acres they've taken from property owners back to the original owners, though. And if this method is blocked, they'll just find another legal loophole to get undermine the concept of private property.

[justshutupandtakeit]

I wasn't even speaking of blocking anything but actually PROSECUTING perpetrators of fraud as you described. That would definitely put a stop to such activities.

Victims of crime rarely get their property back.

[maine-iac7]

next door decisions didn't do the Conn. folk much good - did it

[justshutupandtakeit]

You managed to miss the point. Begging Washington (i.e. the USSC) for help was not successful. Local solutions to local problems are best. Feel free to show me where I said it was easy. But there was no constitutional remedy at the federal level.

[maine-iac7]

Just off the top of my head, I might do some of the following: organize the neighbors to picket, use the local media to raise hell, and find all kind of legal delay tactics to make Walmart uncomfortable enough to leave us alone.

if you have been reading this whole Conn. saga of private property takeover for other private parties - you may have stumbled across all these and more struggles of the people who are being dispossessed - they have been fighting and loosing for a long time - they have gone thru all the hoops - but they do not have the deep pockets their enemies have - the little guy is now a land owner so long as someone else doesn't want it.

They fought from their town and the courts all the way up to the supremes - and lost again. Only they are not the only ones who have lost -now we all can fall to the same land grab fate - believe it.

There should never arise the question of havine to fight to keep your property from being stolen for other private entities - you should not have to go bankrupt to try to save your home - it is a question that should not even arise. The Constitution spells it out - eminent domain if not to take one private persons land and give to another - like a Condo developer or a shopping mall.