Freeport moves to seize 3 properties-Court's decision empowers the city to acquire the site...

www.chron.com/ ^ | June 23, 2005, 11:35PM | THAYER EVANS

[barkeep]

If I recall correctly, 11 states have such laws. Refer to post #46, two state reps have introduced a State Constitutional Amendment to do just that, Kelo did at least leave the individual states empowered to limit their own authority o use imminent domain. The proposed bill just hit the hopper Friday, has not at this moment been assigned a HR number, and cannot move in special session without Perry's OK. By Tuesday should be able to look it up under sponsors' names, either Scott Campbell or Frank Cort. We need to flood offices with contacts on this.

[Uncle Vlad]

Walker would not have to pay any property taxes to the City on his proposed yacht basin. He would get a free ride by the City basically forever. See his Development Agreement for more details.

The insane ruling by the Supreme Court said that generating more tax revenue is an example of "the public good." How then does taking the private property of one citizen and giving it to another private citizen AND giving the latter private citizen a break from all property taxes constitute ANY public good?

This stinks on ice.

[brushcop]

Yes, there comes a time to resist tyranny, whether of the courts or elected "authorities". It comes down to the individual and how much he/she is willing to concede before saying "Here's where I draw the line".

Have you noticed the articles across the nation? Developers and other entities have apparently been waiting for this opportunity and they are wasting no time.

How about a developer that can raise the cash to purchase a rancher's holdings in order to be developed, what's the difference? We have plenty of Real Estate/Developer's mega-companies with enough capital to do that very thing--no sweat. This is going to be real interesting...

[brushcop]

Okay, sometimes I'm a little slow on the uptake, run this by me although I know it's been explained (or send sources) somewhere on Freep threads, how can state law supersede SCOTUS decisions/precedence?

I write real letters (USPS stuff you hold in your hands and read--or shred) a lot, just give me the data to base my flame-out on. Thanks!

[The_Victor]

...how can state law supersede SCOTUS decisions/precedence?

In the ruling, Justice Stevens suggested that greater protection against such takings can be remedied by the state legislatures.

[Dante3]

This is just the start. By the time the Supreme Court's ruling is reversed if it even will be reversed, an incredible amount of damage will be done. The Supreme Court, starting with its porn ruling which has never been reversed, has shown it can overrule the Constitution and to heck with the oath of office.

[untenured]

Okay, sometimes I'm a little slow on the uptake, run this by me although I know it's been explained (or send sources) somewhere on Freep threads, how can state law supersede SCOTUS decisions/precedence?

The decision simply means that the federal constitution does not prohibit all levels of government within the US from seizing property for transfer to other private parties. It doesn't require that states allow their local government do this. Instead, states may set stricter limits on eminent domain powers exercised by the state and localities within the state.

[DoctorMichael]

Utilitarianism = The Greatest Good for the Greatest Number; The needs of the 'Many' outweigh the needs of the 'Few'; The needs of the Commune-ity trump Individual Rights.

Could much the same be said of the Pre-Civil War South?

Are we now just slaves?

[jpsb]

You will make a very fine serf.

[Judith_knows]

Yeah, but since the President has been silent on the issue, and his spokesman dodged the question when pointedly asked, I don't think there's going to be much help from the White House.
____

Does anyone find it strange that the President was so vocal (and the rest of them) with regards to the Shaivo case and yet this...which is a far bigger deal, IMHO, draws no fire?

Even though I lean left, if there were REAL conservatives in the administration, I wouldn't even care at this point. I don't really have an issue with any of the conservatives on this board, as I am a fierce defender of property rights myself. I'd take real conservatives over neoconservatives or wimpy dems any day of the week.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

FREEPORT - With Thursday's Supreme Court decision, Freeport officials instructed attorneys to begin preparing legal documents to seize three pieces of waterfront property along the Old Brazos River from two seafood companies for construction of an $8 million private boat marina.

They're gonna destroy two legitimate businesses so that a bunch of wine-sipping fat b@st@rds will have a place to park their boats! Geez...

[jess35]

The public good is always being served when jobs and industry are created.

Tell me, oh socialist one....how the public good is served when older middle class people are thrown a few thousand dollars and told to vacate their property so that private developers can build $400,000 condominiums? Eminent domain almost ALWAYS targets the middle and lower classes. They take their land and make it impossible for those people to remain in the communities because they've priced them out of the market. How is the public good served when a retired person has their land seized and they see their investment turn to RENT MONEY? Tell me, I REALLY want to know.

[jess35]

The President always panders to the social conservatives. The social conservatives are an easy mark. You can bluster about the sanctity of life without having to actually DO anything about it....and they don't really care about fiscal conservatism as long as there protection for the unborn, people with terminal illnesses (even if they WANT to die) and government sanctioned prayer. Don't expect them to get upset about fiscal issues because that is far, far, down on their list of concerns.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

We could always see what's going on over at dogdoo.com

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

The Wall Street Jurnal reported that the Bush Administration wanted to file a friend of the court brief in support of the city of New London. So property owners should not expect any help from the Bush administration.

Makes me glad I didn't vote for that Slimy Republican b@st@rd twice.

[Cultural Jihad]

Tell me, I REALLY want to know.

You would have to first learn to stop calling people libelous names if you REALLY expect a civil answer from them.

[jess35]

Were you not advocating the idea that the public good is ALWAYS served when new jobs and industry are created....regardless of HOW those new jobs are brought into an area? Ping me when the Blue Meanies decide to steal someone's waterfront land so that they can build themselves a private mansion with a view.

If the shoe fits.....

[oceanview]

Ginsburg and Stevens will retire sometime between 2008-2012 I would think.

[CindyDawg]

We don't need more expansion and the government couldn't even function before ED2:'). Seriously, if it's not what part of "no" don't you understand, in the constitution then it's going to continue to be stretched to fit agendas. No EM just seem much simpler IMO.

[spunkets]

"Nazi-like"

You mean like the fascism the SCOTUS just blessed?