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 ...
oh goodie a Freakin Wal-mart on every corner now.
This doesn't stop at land. It applies to all property. Guns, money and butter and beyond.
ping
I don't think so. With all the flags out there since the attacks, flying them upside down would make a statement. If this gets any legs, no one could ignore it.
If this were to happen to me, there'd be quite a few politicians and judges homes burned to the ground.
F'ing tyrants.
I do not advocate revolution. I only think of what I foresee.
FMCDH(BITS)
You are exactly right. Local gov't is ignored by the public, yet is the largest source of corruption among elected officials.
Given that local politicians are rarely thrown out of office, they consolidate their power and look for revenue wherever it can be found.
FMCDH(BITS)
It's a federal issue because the Bill Of Rights specifically precludes the taking of private property for public use without due process and compensation. The fact that it does not mention the taking of private property by the Government for "private " use clearly denies that right to the government. It becomes a federal issue since the 14th Amendmant establishes the rights enshrined in the Constitution as being protected by the Federal Constitution through the US govenment against abuse by the states.
I think this will depress property values. I for one would never consider purchasing property anywhere that would be considered "convenient " to town.
Don't be so sure...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1879557
The DemocRATS don't seem to like this news either, though perhaps for different reasons as they are anti-business. Really I see this as a case of bad politicians on both sides turning against the interests of all americans.
That said, how do you define "due process"?
This is socialism.
Christ, are those people freaks. Some of them start off well and flame out with their anti-capiltalist screed. They are really loony and all seem to believe this nation was intended to be a socialist country. Morons.
Perhaps, but isn't funny how people from both sides seem to agree on this issue?
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
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.