Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Gabz
Much the same as how the antis have gotten people used to the idea that private businesses are actually "public places."

I read that if they come for my house and property they have to give me compensation. They can't just kick me out on the street.

52 posted on 06/25/2005 12:37:08 PM PDT by SheLion (Trying to make a life in the BLUE state of Maine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]


To: SheLion
I read that if they come for my house and property they have to give me compensation. They can't just kick me out on the street.

It has always been that way and the folks in this case were not fighting about the compensation - they were fighting because their property was being taken not for public use (roads, bridges) but for private use (condos and offices).......in other words they felt the city had over stepped the bounds on using eminent domain

In all of the battles against smoking bans we have fought the idea that private businesses were public places what this ruling basically says is they are right, because creating tax revenue and jobs (economic development) is a "public use" according to this ruling, even if it is a private developer.

56 posted on 06/25/2005 12:45:06 PM PDT by Gabz (My give-a-damn is busted.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson