THE END OF PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS

Nealz Nuze ^ | June 24, 2005 | Neal Boortz

[Bear_Slayer]

There are eight states in the nation where the use of eminent domain for private development is all but prohibited by law. Those states are Washington, Montana, Illinois, Kentucky, Arkansas, Maine, South Carolina and Florida. If your state is not on this list, it's time for a little political activism

Can you clarify this with regard to the state of Montana? Are you saying that this SCOTUS ruling does not apply or is limited in Montana? Thanks,

[The Last Rebel]

So I guess China can use this ruling to buy whatever they want now, huh?


TLR

[Leatherneck_MT]

"Why are we putting up with this?"

Because we are a nation of cowards

[CDHart]

"If we don't do it now and get it under control and put this Government back in it's box, violently if necessary, then we will lose every ounce of freedom we ever had."

"The tree of liberty should be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure." Just paraphrasing Thomas Jefferson.

Carolyn

[Leatherneck_MT]

Amen Carolyn

[3dognight]

Churches own some of the best real estate in downtowns. I imagine it would be very tempting to some city council/developer to take their property.

[maryz]

Hey, even my lib friends were incensed over this decision.

I haven't checked myself, but on another thread I saw that DU hates it and considers it a "conservative" decision!

[Gatún(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)]

Well said.

[OpusatFR]

"Because we are a nation of cowards."

I don't believe that for a minute. What we are is not organized.

[Gatún(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)]

Thank you for your reply.

[taxed2death]

"Bottom line: If you own property, and the government wants that property --- you're screwed"


Actually, you never really OWN property here in the US. You "Buy" the right to use it, with restrictions. If you stop paying property taxes, you break the contract with the government and lose your use of the property.

[Hostage]

This is unbelievable. I'm still in shock, don't know what to say.

Maybe I will end up as a media created nutcase in disobedience against government special commercial interests.

Saw that one of the Connecticut homeowners, a party to the suit, is not leaving their home. Maybe I should throw it in with them.

I can see the headlines now:

"Right wing extremists holed up in comdemned home, reports of child abuse inside, Attorney General Alberto Reno orders FBI-BATF-DHS to lay siege on home."

But really I am chilled by yesterday's news. My properties are eye-candy to special interests and I can imagine they could use yesterday's decision to remove me from 'their proposed acquisition'.

I am not kidding, I may not die quietly in this life. The only thing I don't understand completely is if the action by the Connecticut authorities was to eliminate 'blight' and who is to say what is 'blight'? If my home is tidy and well kept but my neighbors are in decay, can the government remove me from my home for their 'blight'? I think that's what yesterday's message says.

Often when people take it upon themselves to clean up a 'blighted' neighborhood they are rewarded with an increase in property taxes. That happened to me. So blight in my view is linked with tax policies.

I guess if yesterday's decision is carried to its extreme, there could be riots unless eminent domain is used in small tracts where homeowners are not able to get larger communities to come to their aid.

This one has me scared. I can't imagine that all I have sweated for is at risk of takeover by the government for tax revenues. I live in an upscale waterfront mixed residential and cafe district and I can see them rezoning me as commercial and then taking over.

I have ideas of selling all and moving to Australia or New Zealand. I know that there are property rights there. Unless Americans make a successful stand against this insane ruling, many of us will have to emigrate and find a new America. Comments?

[sgtbono2002]

What good would it be for State Legislatures to outlaw taking land from Private owners when rich people wishing to buy it would take the ruling to the Federal Supreme Court and have it banished , just like they did when they allowed this to begin with.

No what is needed is a wholesale uprising of taxpayers. What is needed is for no one to pay their taxes come April 15th. That will get their attention.

[AK-47]

I'd like to see the homes of the justices be bulldozed, but we all know that ain't going to happen.

[Dead Corpse]

Boortz knocks another one out of the ballpark.

[Leatherneck_MT]

Then let's GET organized.

What irritates me to no end is some of our national "leaders" alleged Conservatives, have set squat about this issue. The Rank and file have talked about almost nothing else since the ruling came out. But our leaders? Mum

[KoRn]

As with most other things I strongly agree with Boortz on this. If there has ever been cause for a Constitutional Amendment to reverse a court this is it! The movement should start now.

[Americanexpat]

"I haven't checked myself, but on another thread I saw the DU hates it and considers it a "conservative"decision."

The decision was made by liberal judges and they blame conservatives, now that is a typically liberal mentality.

This is what happens when you get people appointed for life to a position this important, they become dictators. Get rid of these senile SOB's and get some new blood in there and shorten their tenure.

[Paleo Conservative]

Even though the Supremes approved these government confiscations of private property, the five justices who voted with the majority did say that they didn't like it. They encouraged local jurisdictions to pass laws severely restricting these seizures. There are eight states in the nation where the use of eminent domain for private development is all but prohibited by law.

Even enhanced state protections of private property won't protect a against eminent domain takings by the federal government or the UN!

[Victor]

What can be done down the road to reverse this nonsense?