Supreme Court Expands Power of Eminent Domain

Chicago Tribune ^ | June 23, 2005 | David G. Savage

[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.

[Nick Danger]

I have an idea. Let's get the DC City Council to condemn the Supreme Court building so they can put up a Wal*Mart.

[CaptainAwesome2]

I hope someone bulldozes their homes.

[Still Thinking]

Be more useful (and that's going a ways, cuz I HATE Great-Wall Mart)!

[Cruzin2fold]

Guys

This is an issue both the far left, far right, and libertarians totally agree. Lets work together to remove these judges , or do whatever needs to be done.

I personally, have never written to a single politician. I always vote, minus one small election, since I have been registered. Someone educate me on what my options are. This pisses me off so bad I am having a tinge of activism hit me.

This ruling is so for a few elite in every city to run ramshod over anyone they want. I am simply DISGUSTED with the SC.

[ncountylee]

Horrible decision.

[LegendHasIt]

I THOUGHT I heard something about this earlier ... Missed the first half, so I thought it was maybe something out of the 9th "Circus" court, that would be overturned by anyone that ever read the Constitution.

Cripes------

All I can say is:

OVER MY DEAD BODY.

[A Jovial Cad]

We agree with a lot of the DUmmies on this matter, but for distinctly different reasons: they see it, by and large, as a boon for HUEEGE CORPORATIONS; we see it as a blow to liberty.

Regardless, a few of them actually veered dangerously close to commonsense on this singular issue. Wonders never cease.

[Lancey Howard]

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.

[SoCal Pubbie]

The problem is that private property has been redefined as public property. Therefore male only clubs are outlawed, bars are forced to be non smoking, etc. because they are "public accommodations". The government has made almost every facet of human life, except sodomy, the domain of "the public good".

[festus]

If I am reading this ruling correctly it appears the US Supreme court just made it perfectly legal for the city of New York to sieze the property that the UN is built on for purposes of building a shopping mall.