The Supremes: Trashing the Constitution - (Founders would be disheartened, if they knew!)

OPINION EDITORIALS.COM ^ | JUNE 24, 2005 | GEORGE C. LANDRITH

[CHARLITE]

The Supreme Court by a 5-to-4 vote continued its unrelenting thrashing of the Constitution. The Court ruled in Kelo v. City of New London that local governments may seize private homes, businesses, or land against the owner's will and then re-sell the property to another private owner. No real "public use" is required; the government need only allege that the new owner will generate more taxes. Thus, if the government thinks that a convenience store, hotel, apartment building or business will result in more taxes, they can force you out and compel you to sell your home. That's the verdict of five unelected liberals - in black robes who obviously haven't read Constitution in years.

The Takings Clause of Fifth Amendment to the Constitution prohibits the government from taking private property unless it is for "public use" and "just compensation" is paid. The Founders believed these two checks on the government's power to take private property were critical to preventing its abuse. Historically, the government could require private landowners to sell their property to the government for things like schools, libraries, and roads. But now the government can force you against your will to sell them your land simply because they want it. They can now justify this abuse simply by alleging the new owner will likely pay more taxes than you pay. This is stunning!

This is what happens when liberals rule on your constitutional rights. To them, the document has no inherent meaning - it means whatever they want it to mean. When they say, "It is a living, breathing document," that is code for, "It is a meaningless document and five of us can change it whenever and however we want."

The five liberals on the Supreme Court have once again taken off their judicial robes, violated their oath of office, trashed the Constitution, and abused their power to unilaterally rewrite or amend the Constitution. Government now can take all private property for essentially whatever reason its wants. Next time some well-healed developer thinks he'd like to build himself a bigger house on your property and you won't sell it to him, he can just ask the city council - with whom he plays golf and to whose campaign he contributes - to force you sell your home to him. So much for liberals caring about the "little guy."

The Court's majority opinion blathered and bloviated for more than twenty pages ineptly arguing that seeking more taxes is a "public use" as intended in the Constitution. This, of course, turns the Fifth Amendment on its head and makes the term "public use" completely meaningless. Public use was once a limit on government's ability to seize your property. Now, anything qualifies a public use. Thus, it is no longer a real check on government abuse. The Court essentially amended the Constitution by removing the public use requirement - and they did it with only five votes.

Sadly, the Court's decision and other recent decisions make it clear that the Court now gives scant attention to the Constitution itself and instead prefers to discuss and rely upon foreign law, treaties to which the United States is not a party, public opinion polls, and earlier court decisions. But the actual text of the Constitution receives scant attention. The historical context and the intention of the Founders receives even less.

In a stinging dissenting opinion, Justice O'Connor correctly states, "[A]ll private property is now vulnerable to being taken and transferred to another private owner.... [T]he Court ... wash[es] out any distinction between private and public use of property - and effectively [deletes] the words "for public use" from the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment."

Justice Thomas, also dissenting, wrote, "I do not believe that this Court can eliminate liberties expressly enumerated in the Constitution..." Justice Thomas is absolutely correct. The Supreme Court has no legitimate power to eliminate our enumerated constitutional rights. But five justices did precisely that and violated their oath of office.

If this most recent decision doesn't highlight the need for the President of the United States to appoint judges who will strictly uphold and faithfully interpret the Constitution, nothing will.

George Landrith, President
Frontiers of Freedom

Virginia Office:
P.O. Box 69
Oakton, Virginia 22124
Ph. 703-246-0110 - Fax 703-246-0129

Capitol Hill Office:
209 Pennsylvania Ave. SE, Suite 2100
Washington, D.C. 20003

Comments: george@ff.org

[CHARLITE]

"This is what happens when liberals rule on your constitutional rights. To them, the document has no inherent meaning - it means whatever they want it to mean. When they say, "It is a living, breathing document," that is code for, "It is a meaningless document and five of us can change it whenever and however we want."

[spyone]

Who(names please) voted for this?

[CHARLITE]

FYI ping.

Char :)

[RightWhale]

How many threads is this on this non-happening?

[traviskicks]

Some thoughts on this:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1429877/posts

Petition to impeach justices
http://www.petitiononline.com/lp001/petition.html

Some more on the Founding of the United states (and the constitutionality of charity)
http://www.neoperspectives.com/foundingoftheunitedstates.htm

[familyop]

The various lobbies for "municipalities" are quite powerful. Most city government interests want centralized, socialist government.

[kpp_kpp]

the reason it is not a "non-happening" is all the 'little guys' were hoping this would be the case to overturn decades of property rights infringement by local governments. instead it has nailed the coffin shut on property rights.

[Mulch]

I called my republican senators from Missouri (Kit Bond, Jim Talent). Their staffers said the the senators had no opinion on the matter. When I asked why, they said the senators were involved in other business. (Bond - some Highway Bill). I guess I'll be involved in other business when they come looking for my vote.

[Ladysmith]

For all those who are concerned about this latest trashing of our Constitution, which apparently doesn't include RightWhale, you might want to listen to Quinn from this morning.

Right click and save this MP3 file or go to http://archives.warroom.com/archives.php.

[Dante3]

BUMP

[Ladysmith]

Great. Just f'ing great.

[goldstategop]

All the more reason to abolish judicial review. In passing the Framers never intended to give the courts the power to pronounce on the validity of the laws. The Supreme Court did that in Marbury and created an entirely new, unchecked power out of whole cloth. No less a figure than President Thomas Jefferson feared the consequences of an imperial judicial magistracy. Which is more or less what we now have in this country. The only way to restore the separation of powers is to take away the power from judges to write their own laws, make policy, and order the elected branches of government around. Otherwise we will end up living in a country the Framers of our Constitution would not recognize if they were alive today. Absolute power corrupts and corrupts absolutely as much in the hands of a judge as in the hands of a politician. That is why is time to get rid of judicial review.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[CHARLITE]

The only four who dissented were Scalia, Thomas, Rehnquist and O'Connor. The other five "made it happen."

Char (:

[upchuck]

I, for one, for over a year here on FR, have been saying,

It's all about the judges!

After hundreds of emails, phone calls and faxes and bunches of uncontributed dollars to the Republican cause on my part, comes this latest travesty of justice.

I'm sorry, but it just totally dumbfounds me that people continue to let five idiots in black robes trash our country.

To me, freedom of speech, freedom of religion and property rights are what make America stand head and shoulders above the rest of the world. We've now lost 1/3 of this and the other 2/3 are under continuous vicious attack from the judiciary.

What's it gonna take for people to wake up on this?

I've been stumbling around in the dictionary and thesaurus trying to find a word to sum up this horrible feeling in my stomach. I think heartsick comes the closest.

[RightWhale]

Yeah, there was hope. Insteads they got a 'hands off' by Fed Gov. We are back on our own resources as usual. New London is a blighted area. Groton is sweet, too bad about the Sub Base being closed. Their shopping mall won't make a bit of difference, but that's the way they want it. Democracy in action.

[AdamSelene235]

To me, freedom of speech, freedom of religion and property rights are what make America stand head and shoulders above the rest of the world. We've now lost 1/3 of this and the other 2/3 are under continuous vicious attack from the judiciary.

You must have missed SCOTUS's CFR ruling which confirmed that criticizing a Senator on teevee within 60 days of an election is a Speech Crime not protected by the 1st Amendment.

[RightWhale]

That's right, I don't see this as epochal one way or the other. If they trashed the 1967 Treaty and established property rights in outer space then I would say that they had done something worthy.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

It's not democracy in action you halfwit.

It's treason and it's socialism, but it's not democracy.

[traviskicks]

I called Senator Dole and Burr from NC, both staffers who answered said they had received a lot of calls on it and could tell people cared about the issue. They said they would update me with what the senators will do. I just told them my opinion, didn't ask what they were going to do about it.

I'll be watching them.