High Court to homeowners: Stick 'em up!

Townhall.com ^ | 9/26/2005 | Paul Jacob

[sirthomasthemore]

It's like a bad dream...But this is real. We live under a regime that can...grab our homes...pays us what it thinks the property's worth, and then hands our property — in finely crafted "sweetheart deals" — to developers...

This is not an isolated case...[t]his is happening all across the nation. Local officials looking to boost their tax take through eminent domain like a vampire looks for fresh neck arteries....

Politicians' lust for money doesn't stop with homeowners and small businesses, though. Churches don't even pay taxes. No revenue stream for politicians at all. Uh-oh....

"We don't oppose churches," Council Chairman Samuel Dean told The Post. "The concern we have is that sometimes churches eat up a lot of land that could be used for other things." ..."None of us are against God." But added: "We're losing tax money and retail." ....

Don't be fooled.. In this case judicial restraint means a general increase in government power....

Certainly, the only meaningful public benefit is more tax dollars collected and spent by politicians. The public gets whatever trickle down benefits come of this government spending. Lucky us.....

They actively expand government power whenever citizens threaten to exert some control over it. And when governments kick John Q. Public in the teeth, the black robes stand aside, in "judicial restraint....."

It reminds us of the fact that while our judicial system has been hijacked, so too have our legislatures and city councils become dens of thieves...

. The Kelo decision tells us how predatory our government has become. The America Dream, cut into and carved up by so many politicians, was this week struck down by the courts. But we're not giving in to them. We must get it back.

[moehoward]

BTTT

[FreeReign]

Well, it is a land grab by well-heeled interests through the instrument of local government. It is a power grab by government because they hold the power of eminent domain, and that power has been expanded.

The power has been expanded??

The USSC held that "public use" equals "public purpose" many years ago. I believe it was in the 1890's. I'd have to look up the case.

Government power has not been expanded.

BTW, would you feel better if the New London urban renewal project created government owned buildings instead of privately owned buildings?

[FreeReign]

How about outrage from a GOP Mayor of a major muncipality Fat chance..All the local politicians are seeing $$$$$ Im sure Home Depot and Marshalls and other BIG store moguls are already checking ou tpossibilities and are out on the golf course as we speak with local mayors and such opportunist , looking to make a deal..Im getting more and more disgusted by our politicians as time goes on..Republicans included..We now have a govt. of professional money grabbers..There are NO statesmen left..Not a one

As I've said. It's been going on for a century of more.

Most likely there's a lot of corruption involved in most ED plans. Certainly the power of ED has been abused. That said, it's the politicians who should be held accountable not the USSC.

[oblomov]

Yes, I would feel better. At least it would be public, not that I think that we need more lands to be owned by the government. In any case, the government realizes no tax revs from government buildings. If a private developer comes along and extends the promise of greater revs, then the governemtn just becomes a means of transferring property to the developer. It's insidious, and it was not precedent until June 23, 2005.

Before Kelo, the two most recent relevant decisions were Berman and Midkiff. Midkiff was more of a special case, and though abusive, it didn't introduce an element of moral hazard. Berman was the ruling that held that "blight" could be used as justification for condemnation.

This post at SCOTUSblog was the most heartening thing I've read on the subject. It gave me hope that the backlash to Kelo might produce political action, despite the opposing intentions of our rulers. The perfect storm? I hope so.

[sirthomasthemore]

Free Reign.

With due respect, you possibly don't see the legal implications here, because they seem far fetched. But the Court's decision, has just given unprecedented power to local officials.

A practical example. I own a 115 year old well maintained Victorian in the middle of Fairfield County Ct. Land is gold here. The average price of a home in Greenwich, for instance, is $1.5M.

Now, on my property, a developer could lawfully erect 6 townhouses. I pay about $9,000 a year in property tax. But 6 townhouses would net the town $54,000.00. Under Kelo, the City now has every right to come in and take my property by eminant domain based on the argument that they are taking down a 115 year old building, and replacing it with 6 new units which would benefit the municipality by the increased tax base of 45K per annum..

Do you really want to defend that?

[Outland]

[Uncle Vlad]

That's a perfect picture! Now that the mask has come off, look for the rabid support Wal-Mart enjoys even on Free Republic to melt away. This is truly not Sam Walton's company anymore. The kids have it now, and they don't care who and what they step on to get what they want.

[traviskicks]

lol yea I am one of those 'rabid wallmart supporters' but that pic still is funny.

[mewzilla]

When I first wrote about this subject, I thought it would be of narrow interest. I mean, normal human beings don't get excited about Supreme Court cases, do they?

I know people who haven't given a rat's rear end about anything political in decades who are livid about this.

[mewzilla]

Wally doesn't seize properties. Local governments do.

[traviskicks]

thanks for that. I hadn't seen those perspectives. Interesting.

[TheForceOfOne]

I wonder who really owns my property and what they plan to do with it?

I guess we need to reword mortgage signing papers to read, its yours until we find something better to do with it little man!

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

Right. The judiciary is the ROOT. The senate rats/RINOs are its offensive line. We need a quarterback blitz in 2008. And the best man for the job that I see right now is Hannity. Let's bring him kicking and screaming to the White House. He'll have coat tails. And I have a hunch that he could handle the senate in a way no conservative president ever has before. He should put a radio studio in the Oval Office.

FRegards....

[TheForceOfOne]

Most people don't truly understand the erosion of the rights we were promised in the Constitution and other founding documents until they're personally victimized by the loss of one of those rights. Divide and conquer works well when we stand around and say, what right? I didn't feel a thing.

[AD from SpringBay]

We are becoming less and less safe on our own turf, even if we own it.

We don't own turf anymore. We just rent it and pay taxes on it, but when push comes to shove, the big fat hog momma guv'ment owns all the turf. That's what this ruling is all about - being allowed to live where the local elites say you can live.

[johnb838]

when the first activist judges took to their benches,

When would that have been, 1804? This frogs been boiling a long, long time. Blaming the people isn't really that helpful. I'm tired of it.

[johnb838]

Any pol you ask says "It's horrible, horrible, harrumph", but I doubt any of them do anything about it.

[FireTrack]

"After three days, Georgy Porgy Bush II is still absent"

You mean "King George" don't ya?

[Uncle Vlad]

Wally and other unscrupulous developers use local governments to seize property. (There are moral developers and amoral developers.) Local governments are only the vehicle by which they do it.

[Noachian]

When would that have been, 1804?

1803. Marbury v Madison. That's when Marshall decided that the courts knew better than the people's representatives what legislation was "constitutional".

Blaming the people isn't really that helpful. I'm tired of it.

You can be tired of it, but the fact is that this country is "supposed" to be governed "by the people" not by judges.

The people have had the power to turn the activist courts around for years, but they didn't. So, if the people run the country, and they let judges take that authority away from them who else is there to blame?

Like it or not the people are to blame for the present condition of the judiciary, and just because that idea doesn't sit well with you doesn't change the facts.

On the other hand the people still have the power to turn the courts around by pressuring Congress and the President. It'll take more than putting conservative judges on the federal benches. It'll take a people who are mad enough to change the way Congress does "business".