Posted on 06/26/2005 4:22:57 AM PDT by Liz
The stereotype is that conservatives are heartless and in the tank to big business — while liberals are the ones who stand up for the little guy.
So how come the liberal Supreme Court justices just sold a bunch of New London, Conn., homeowners up the Thames River?
In essence, the court expanded the requirement of "public use" — the longtime limit on eminent domain — to anything that supposedly enhances economic activity. No more need for a truly public need — such as highways, parks and bridges.
The liberal bloc — Justices John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David Souter and Stephen Breyer — joined with moderate Anthony Kennedy to state that economic development is a legitimate "public purpose" that can override private property rights.
The court's more conservative members — Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justices Sandra Day O'Connor, Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia — all dissented.
"The specter of condemnation hangs over all property. Nothing is to prevent the state from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton......" wrote O'Connor.
Added Thomas: "Losses will fall disproportionately on poor communities. Those communities are not only systematically less likely to put their lands to the highest and best social use, but are also the least politically powerful."
It's ironic that the conservative justices are the ones who sound like the New York liberal voices that rise to block almost any sort of economic development.
Kelo is the logical end product of a political philosophy that seeks generally to expand government power.
It did so this time, in spades.
Both Congress and state governments need immediately to consider what specific limits can be drawn on the concept of "public purpose" — and how best to mitigate the effects of this truly disturbing decision.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
This fight isn't about liberal vs. conservative. It's about We the People versus Developers and Big Corporations.
The sooner we realize this, the better.
There was a post yesterday about that "just compensation" - $150,000 for a 10-room, waterfront home. That won't even buy you one of these cookie-cutter structures on a postage-stamp sized piece of drained swamp land that are popping up all over Florida these days.
And now for that homeowner, it's take it, or else. How long is it until the city governments start crying that even that piece of chump change is too much of a burden for them to bear?
There was a post yesterday about that "just compensation" - $150,000 for a 10-room, waterfront home. That won't even buy you one of these cookie-cutter structures on a postage-stamp sized piece of drained swamp land that are popping up all over Florida these days.
And now for that homeowner, it's take it, or else. How long is it until the city governments start crying that even that piece of chump change is too much of a burden for them to bear?
The liberals in the local media will make sure that never happens, just like they'll make sure that no Section Eight "homeowner" or anyone else in a state-approved "victim group" will ever have to worry. OTOH, look for lots of churches to turned into abortion clinics.
Dream on. Do they actually think that bunch of pompous, preening jackasses are actually going to tear themselves away from their deals to keep their cozy little club going, or their face time in the MSM, to even spare a second's thought for people who are facing losing the home they've worked their lives for?
OTOH, you can damned well bet the senators will have plenty of time to visit with the lobbyists bearing big fat campaign checks who are interested in making sure that taking your property is as painless as possible for their employers.
Has anyone heard Bush railing about this supreme court decision? Vote third party before it is to late!
Yes, this isn't a liberal or conservative issue, despite all the slams at the "liberal justices" who signed the decision. Individual rights are the bedrock of democracy, and property rights are among the most basic. Our government is simply far too attached to big money. There are no individuals represented in our present policies--the beneficiaries are all corporations, whether military/industrial, pharmaceutical, real estate, oil, or any other. Who is standing up for the individual except in photo-ops? Protect your vote! Demand a paper trail in your state before the next election. We the people have to protect the rights of "we, the people."
I heard that on Neil's show too but couldn't remember if it was 150K or 160K. Thanks for the reminder.
How about we have the states turn Cape Cod and Long Island into much needed wind farms to help with the electricity shortages sure to come. Look at all the revenue that would generate.
And there is nothing to indicate this applies to just land. They could take a dog, a cat, or a Picasso painting ("we do need items for our nice museum").
Don't worry, they won't. And we are.
They'll "use it" and do as much as they did with gay marriage, etc., etc.
- John
I hope you are wrong about that.
I'm sorry; I don't understand your post. Could you clarify?
I'm not so sure. Well, maybe the well monied can hold it off, or probably more likely push it to the middle class. Where I live, we had a connector to the airport stalled for 25+ years going through a very poor neighborhood. This clearly met the public use part of the constitution, yet those homeowners kept the government at bay for those all so many years.
Do you think it will be more difficult for homeowners to stall projects like that in light of the SCOTUS ruling?
This ruling could bring the whole thing down. Imagine these scenarios.
Politicians everywhere start cozying up to developers and get a set of plans drawn up to develop on property owned by people the politician doesn't like. Then they just force them away - condemn the property, give pennies on the dollar. Perhaps the "developer" is just a phony corp, and dissolves once the city has the property.
Whether you are a gun store in California, a Planned Parenthood in Utah, a conservative church in Seattle, or a Moveon.org office in Alabama - you can be evicted and put out of operation by politicians cooperating with developers. What happens to a radio station studio when a local reporter gets a "Watergate" on the Mayor?
In reality, someone who finally gets it.
As some other poster noted, this has been going on for years. The court just reaffirmed what had been practice.
In my city, in the late 50's and through the 60's a couple of slum areas were eminent domained and turned over to private firms that developed office complexes and apartment buildings. Not the subsidized stuff, but full rent. What was different between those and the New London deal is the developers created quasi public entities to get around the "public" part of the eminent domain rules. Frankly, it happened the same way with a baseball team in Arlington Tx and the front man now lives on Pa Avenue in Wash DC. Other sports complexes have done the quasi public entity creation too. What the Supremes did is to make the quasi stuff no longer needed.
Thanks for your answer.
I have a lot of problems with the ruling and one of those is the "just compensation". It's not just at all.
For instance, in New London, one of the men is going to be paid $150,000 for a 10 room house. We used to live in Connecticut and I can assure you that the best he can buy with that money is a 5 room shack, at most, and certainly not on the water or in a great neighborhood.
That is outrageous. People work their whole lives, pay into the system, obey the laws of the land, and the goverment just takes their property like that, without paying fair market value and more considering they didn't want to move? Outrageous.
And I know that taking has been going on for years. But typically it's gone on for major projects...not for office buildings.
The only good to come of this, imo, is for people to understand what activist courts really mean to them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.