[absalom01]

Thanks for posting this, but the USSC just confirmed what's been standard practice for at least the past 20 years. Besides us kooks, who cares?

[kpp_kpp]

isn't not upholding the constitution ground for impeaching a justice?

five impeachments need to be submitted to congress tomorrow.

this is so blatent! "everyone" (obviously not) knows what "public use" means.

even my liberal friends are shocked at this verdict. (shocked that they agree with the four who decented.)

[lmr]

Several years ago, a not so busy corner on the edge of my town had a liquor store standing on it. The property owner was renting the building to them. The property owner also had a 20 acre empty lot right next to it. As the city grew, Home Depot bought the lot next to the liquor store and attempted to buy the lot the liquor store stood on. As it happens, the liquor store had a 50-year lease on the property. Home Depot wanted the lot for more parking. The property owner and Home Depot blocked all access to the liquor store with construction cones to try to put them out of business. After a lengthy court battle, the liquor store won. Needless to say after about 12 years or so, the liquor store still thrives on that corner, The Home Depot is now defunct, a great ironic twist if you ask me.

[clintonh8r]

One possible upside to this...maybe the RINO-trash in the Senate will now be more disposed to support conservative SCOTUS nominees. But I'm not getting my hopes up.

[Hank Rearden]

"Nine out of ten voices in my head are telling me to clean my guns."

[taxesareforever]

Maybe the bell is just signalling round two of the Revolutionary War.

You must mean Round two of the Civil War. The Civil War was fought over states rights and it is possible that another could happen. Decisions like this from the court will cause people to arm themselves and protect their property.

[ntnychik]

Excellent post, BOT. I just finished reading Joseph Ellis' "His Excellency," about George Washington. It very clearly makes the point how Washington felt about personal property rights. A Supreme Court that can smash the fifth amendment, can do the same to the second.

[TheOtherOne]

BIGTIME RANT:

If my money, my business, my home, my car are all my property. This rule says, if the government thinks they can put my property to a use that is more beneficial to the public, then they may seize my property from my with the only requirement being just compensation.

Heck, I admit my car would help the police. My savings would help the CA perpetual budget crisis if I invested with them. All my property would benefit the public more if the government had it.

Do you want to know why? . . . because I am selfish, I use my property to aid my life, and my family. I guess that is now un-american according to the supreme court.

Wouldn't the public benefit if government took over all sports leagues and let us go for free. That even makes more sense when you realize they take property to build the stadiums.

Hey, hold up, I got an Idea!!!!

I am going to the LA city council see if they want to be 50-50 partners with me. I will 'take' the lakers. I only want 50% of the take, the government can have the other half. See, I will let the people have a cut, I am a better citizen.

Ah, so anyone who bribes the government with money will, according to this court, be more worthy of property rights.

[upchuck]

Personally, I hope this wakes up a whole bunch of people to the fact that:

It's really all about the judges.

[stylin19a]

The city has carefully formulated a development plan that it believes will provide appreciable benefits to the community, including, but not limited to, new jobs and increased tax revenue,"


1. What if the plan fails ?
2. What if they decide to change the plan ?

It appears the legal criteria is "...as long as the city believes...."

[headsonpikes]

What you said! Great post!

The next step - Construct Soylent Green factories on the expropriated land.

Ha ha.

[Thinkin' Gal]

"The city has carefully formulated a development plan that it believes will provide appreciable benefits to the community, including, but not limited to, new jobs and increased tax revenue," and just destroyed any pretence that you have any recourse whatsoever if the government or county decides that they want your property for any reason at all.

Excellent post. And so much for the property values of the homes stuck as "neighbors" to the new big box mega store, strip mall, business park, condo development, etc.

1 Timothy 6:10-11 For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows. 11 But thou, O man of God, flee these things; and follow after righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness.

Exodus 20:17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.

Which way will the USSC rule on the public display of this witness against them?

[Nuc1]

Well written. One point, sadly we lost our property rights when SCOTUS allowed communities / states to tax our property. From that point on we could only rent it from the government. As I recall this occurred about the early to mid 1800s. Few people seem to know it. For those of you that think this thought extreme, quit paying your property taxes and see who really owns your property.

[mysterio]

Beautiful essay. I agree on all points.

Really want to get something done?

A work stoppage of enough Americans would certainly break the back of any tyranny. Just have to get enough people to not go to work. Any taking up of arms against a tyrannical government would be quickly quelled.

[montag813]

Blame the Kennedys...Anthony Kennedy and Ted Kennedy, that is. Without Anthony, this would have been 5-4 the other way around. And without Ted, Anthony never would be sitting on the SCOTUS to begin with (Robert Bork would).

[montag813]

We have three branches of government. They are co-equal to the extent that power is asserted. It has ever been so.

Would it not be within bounds for the President to declare that this ruling is a violation of the 5th Amendment, and therefore unconstitutional, and issue an executive order suspending the order until Congress can act in emergency session to counteract it?

[YaYa123]

The rich elite of Martha's Vineyard, Walter Cronkite and Ted Kennedy, among other hypocritical environmental wing nuts fight against windmills that destroy their ocean views. Just imagine how they'd howl if their ritzy property was seized.

http://www.climateark.org/articles/reader.asp?linkid=23933

Has any liberal wag spoken on this Supreme Court decision? They won't....until their property is threatened.

[tortoise]

Just to make my voice known, I am bloody furious about this judicial decision. It is vile beyond description, and the impact of this decision dwarfs issues of the day like abortion and gay marriage, which are superficial in many ways. Land of the free my ass. Without private property rights, we have nothing.

The Republic is dead.

[fieldmarshaldj]

Lock 'n load.

[austinmark]

And to think, our Founding Fathers HAD IT RIGHT FROM THE BEGINNING !