Kennedy's Vast Domain [Wallstreet Journal Editorial]

Wallstreet Journal ^ | June 24, 2005 | WSJ Editorial

[bwteim]

Kennedy's Vast Domain

June 24, 2005; Page A12

The Supreme Court's "liberal" wing has a reputation in some circles as a guardian of the little guy and a protector of civil liberties. That deserves reconsideration in light of yesterday's decision in Kelo v. City of New London. The Court's four liberals (Justices Stevens, Breyer, Souter and Ginsburg) combined with the protean Anthony Kennedy to rule that local governments have more or less unlimited authority to seize homes and businesses.

CUT CUT

So, in just two weeks, the Supreme Court has rendered two major decisions on the limits of government. In Raich v. Gonzales the Court said there are effectively no limits on what the federal government can do using the Commerce Clause as a justification. In Kelo, it's now ruled that there are effectively no limits on the predations of local governments against private property.

These kinds of judicial encroachments on liberty are precisely why Supreme Court nominations have become such high-stakes battles. If President Bush is truly the "strict constructionist" he professes to be, he will take note of the need to check this disturbing trend should he be presented with a High Court vacancy.

URL for this article: http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB111957306808268311,00.html

[bwteim]

Today's editorial on SCOTUS ruling.

I checked copyright (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1111944/posts?page=1,50) don't know how much can be posted from WSJ. This is a 'subscribers' only link.

[SkyPilot]

Perhaps this outrageous decision with quell any talk of Bush naming a "moderate" to the Supreme Court when Renquist retire next month.

[bwteim]

It SHOULD on our side, but will just add fuel to the left when it comes to digging in their heels.

[bwteim]

If someone can tell me whether I am permitted to drop in the whole editorial, I will do so.

[Peach]

How is it the left can so successfully frame the issues that they pretend to be for the little guy and opposed to big business when it it the liberals on the court who ruled in favor of big business?

The left particularly targets Wal Mart and pharmaceutical companies and interestingly it is the parmaceutical company Pfizer who will benefit from the eminent domain issue in New London as they will be removing homeowners so that corporation can build an office.

If the conservatives don't make television ads and learn to better frame issues themselves, we're in big trouble. We're in trouble anyway, with this ruling.

[Road Warrior ‘04]

Communism is taking over! Little did I know, when Khrushchev banged his shoe on the podium screaming that "Communism would take over the USA, without firing a shot", did he mean through our liberal/socialistic court system! Government control of personal property is nothing less than COMMUNISM!

Can Supreme Court justices be impeached? If so, how? Maybe Dr. Levin can answer this one.

[hershey]

I misread the title and assumed it was about Fat Teddy. However, there is some hope here in Supreme Court ruling...at least for the town of Hyannis. They could take the Kennedy compound by eminent domain and raze it to the ground!

[bwteim]

Responding to self:

Never mind

http://dowjones.com/

is on the list at

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1111944/posts?page=1,50

[deadeyedawg]

I volunteer my services as the bulldozer operator! HAHA!

[bwteim]

I agree. And we have trouble framing issues and/or the message getting out via MSM.

On one blog someone posted:

"Visit your store where your neighbor used to be."

[OpusatFR]

I don't think they can agree with this ruling since even CNN has picked up on The Dread Pirate WalMart's ability to use this ruling and bypass the usual problems.

The left hates WalMart even more than they hate Scalia.

[Peach]

We need to push Republicans in Congress to try to establish a Constitional Amendment which will effectively overturn the ruling yesterday.

[Archon of the East]

did he mean through our liberal/socialistic court system!

Yes, that is exactly what he meant, and add through our academic institutions and media also.

[bwteim]

Just reading the title that was my first reaction, too. Speaking of the pious Fat One, he was awful his usual self at the hearings yesterday.

[marktwain]

We need to push Republicans in Congress to try to establish a Constitional Amendment which will effectively overturn the ruling yesterday.

You mean like: "nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.", as we already have in the fifth amendment?

It does little good to amend the Constitution, when we have justices who pay no attention to the Constitution.

[Brilliant]

We need a constitutional amendment simply invalidating all Supreme Court decisions made in the last 45 years.

[liberty2004]

If someone can tell me whether I am permitted to drop in the whole editorial, I will do so.

Hell, after yesterday's SC ruling, it seems ridiculous to worry about "copyright" violations. Hell, he SC and most of government don't respect any part of our Constitution.

[bwteim]

It is a question for the Dr. But in the meantime, at least one Justice will be stepping down and the fight is on.

See

http://www.theday.com/eng/web/news/editorial.aspx#Letters

for some letters to the editor of New London, Conn. paper.

[bwteim]

Hey, that's a Brilliant suggestion!

[liberty2004]

It does little good to amend the Constitution, when we have justices who pay no attention to the Constitution.

exactly. It is getting beyond where mere words are enough. We truly need to start organizing to take back our Republic.