A Win for Big Government (Kelo v New London)

The Washington Times ^ | June 24, 2005

[sirthomasthemore]

Cities may now seize homes and businesses and hand them over to private developers to raise tax revenue. That's what the Supreme Court decided yesterday in Kelo v. New London, a 5-4 ruling that strips Connecticut homeowner Susette Kelo and several others of their homes and land. By siding with New London, the court drastically expands traditional eminent-domain powers beyond highways and fighting urban blight. This is a resounding defeat for ordinary landowners and a threat to property rights. Homeowners now own their homes only if the government wants them to.

[DB]

Why can't congress pass a law banning the practice?

All the courts did is say it's constitutional (which it ISN'T). That doesn't mean there can't be a federal law prohibiting it.

[Checkers]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1574059&mesg_id=1574059

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1575546&mesg_id=1575546

DU, of all places, doesn't like the ruling.

[clee1]

Guns overrule the judiciary, and any other tyranny for that matter.

Time for the Second American Revolution.

[billclintonwillrotinhell]

And it's not as if this latest property-rights defeat is an isolated incident of judicial liberalism. We've had all too many examples of liberalism gone mad just in recent weeks from the "high" court:

- If a 17-year-old plans and carries out a mass murder in which thousands of innocent human beings are killed, no American state is allowed to execute him because he hadn't yet turned 18 years of age. (A 5-4 ruling with Kennedy joining the four liberals.)

- The Supreme Court should take into consideration foreign courts' views when considering cases like the death penalty. (A 6-3 opinion with only three justices dissenting - Scalia, Thomas and Rehnquist.)

- Even after a dangerous violent criminal has been convicted by a jury, the court system may not put the criminal in shackles for his sentencing hearing in front of the same jury unless he has exhibited signs of behaving violently in the court system before. (A 7-2 decision with only Scalia and Thomas dissenting.)

- Without any specific evidence of racial bias, the Supreme Court assumed Texas prosecutors were racists when they dismissed 10 of 11 blacks during jury selection. (A 6-3 ruling with only Scalia, Thomas and Rehnquist dissenting).

[IRememberElian]

I've been wondering all day why I haven't heard any White House reaction to one of the most outrageous Supreme Court rulings in recent memory. I guess Bush isn't in any real danger of losing his Crawford ranch to a Wal*Mart building project, but he should show some outrage and some compassion for those less fortunate souls who will lose their property because of this horrible ruling.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't about the only financial success of his previous life when he used similar tactics to get the taxpayers to build the band box the Rangers play in?

[to_zion]

That's what the 2nd is there for! Am I wrong? They'll put us in jail before we try that though.

[sirthomasthemore]

This is quite a tragedy. I certainly hope they were at least required to give Ms. Kelo compensation.

---

888

Wildcat, I read that Ms. Kelo said this isn't said and done yet. Get the muskets and pitchforks :}

[Checkers]

IRememberElian
Since Apr 17, 2005

[clee1]

You can't jail millions of people... and that is what it's coming down to.

I'd rather die on my feet than live on my knees.

[Kay]

Yes, hope those landowners take a stubborn, peaceful stand. Let Janet Reno take 'em out. Ha.

The libs aren't in power any more so the landowners can sit tight.

[Kay]

Are you a conservative or a liberal? Be honest.

[sirthomasthemore]

jwalsh,

What happens in a small town, when the rich and powerful, maybe just don't like someone. What stops them from taking the guys poperty under the guise of community development?

[Dan from Michigan]

This is a big reason why we need to make sure we elect good people to local government. City Council and Mayor positions are more important now than even since they can now tear down your home to give a development present to the mayor's brother in law.........who is a developer.

[billclintonwillrotinhell]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't about the only financial success of his previous life when he used similar tactics to get the taxpayers to build the band box the Rangers play in?

I don't remember if anyone was forced out of their home against their will when the Rangers got their new stadium, but I'll tell you what I do remember...

I remember Elian Gonzalez being taken away in the middle of the night. I saw a couple of TV news reports back then that indicated Bush's campaign didn't want hearings into that raid because it wouldn't be beneficial to the campaign. Apparently, we've traded Elian Gonzalez for Alberto Gonzales, who is now Attorney General and is being rumored as the next Supreme Court justice. I have no confidence whatsoever that Gonzales would make the court any less liberal than it is now.

[sirthomasthemore]

Dan,
I live in Fairfield County Ct, that's southwest corner near NY. We're controlled by 6 or 7 multi, multi millionaire developers. There are just 7 surveying firms of any consequence in the area. The whole planning and zoning thing is all wrapped up in that cozy arrangement between public officials, developers and surveyors- the latter can steal your property with those little telescopes faster than John Gotti with machine guns.

Actually, the Courts were all one had for protection- and not even lower court judges for obvious reasons.

Now, the only real protection one might have is if the State legislators past laws restricting the use of eminent domain for urban renewal- but that's not going to happen in the socialist republic of CT.

[billclintonwillrotinhell]

This is a big reason why we need to make sure we elect good people to local government. City Council and Mayor positions are more important now than even since they can now tear down your home to give a development present to the mayor's brother in law.........who is a developer.

You're exactly right. That's what makes this Supreme Court ruling so frustrating. There will always be corrupt people elected to office, and there will always be people who become corrupt after being elected into office. The courts are supposed to protect Americans from the actions of those people by enforcing the Constitution.

Especially on the local level, voters often don't have any idea who they're electing. Sometimes they'll even vote for someone because their name sounds nice or their picture in the voters' brochure looked pleasant.

The Supreme Court has failed us yet again - big-time.

[Kay]

I am so sorry for you. I truly hope there is a backlash to help your state.

Good grief, they made such a big deal about Erin Brock(whatever) going up against PG&E. This is also about the little guy versus the big guy.

[sirthomasthemore]

Well you should feel sorry for me, Kay. This State has past the first legislative weirdo civil union law, and so actually, my desire to protect my property is secondary to my desire to protect.. oh ..better left unsaid. :)

But, New London is up the coast about an hour and a half. But I would love to see those people hunker down in their houses and refuse to move- period.

In any event, it's 3:30; and I better get some shut eye.
I'll catch you on the board again, I'm sure. Take care.

[NonValueAdded]

I see very little mention that an existing "Italian Dramatic Club (a private cultural organization)" gets saved but "the homes of three plaintiffs in that parcel are to be demolished." That bit of land, parcel 4A is for unspecified "park support." To the homeowners, that means the government plans to pave their paradise and put up a parking lot!

If there was a thorough review of the alternatives, what happened to the alternative that preserved existing housing stock to the maximum extent practical? What gave priority to a dramatic club at the expense of private homes? (no need to answer that one!)

Well, I hope the BRAC proposal to shut down the remaining base facilities there makes Pfizer reconsider their participation, everyone pulls out since they think the economy will tank completely, and the city is left holding the bag. It would serve them right. Maybe GWB can propose a refinery to take the place of the sub base. That will boost the local economy. Somehow I don't think they'll go for it, though.

Incidentally, under the guise of "follow the money," while no one apparently benefited directly from this proposed taking, it might be interesting to look at land sales of the surrounding parcels that will also receive a boost in value due to the project. That might just prove to be interesting.

[nutmeg]

bttt