WSJ: Supreme Folly - The Kelo ruling upholds a 'scandalous and cruel' act.

Wall Street Journal ^ | June 27, 2005 | RICHARD A. EPSTEIN

[OESY]

...To understand why Kelo is truly horrible, it is necessary to look both at Kelo and the constitutional logic of public use requirement. On the former, the declining economic fortunes of New London spurred the city elders to embark on a general urban development plan, underwritten by $73 million in state money devoted to general planning, physical infrastructure and environmental cleanup. The plan lacked only one ingredient -- some real live developer prepared to risk his own capital to build any office or hotel on part of the 90 or so acres the City already had.

Not content with its overheated vision, New London's plan envisioned taking down about 15 old homes overlooking Long Island Sound, to be used for some unidentified form of "park support." Fancy new private homes were not listed on the plan. None of the endless frustration and delays in implementing its grand plan were attributable to the decision of some landowners to fight New London.... One obvious compromise position, therefore, should have appealed even to the five member majority on the Supreme Court: to force the City to postpone the condemnation of these private homes until the City revealed its hand.

No such luck with Justice Stevens, for in his view New London had made its case when it asserted, without evidence, that the new projects would both increase tax revenues and create new jobs. It hardly mattered that its projections had been pulled out of thin air and were already hopelessly out of date when the case reached the Supreme Court. All that need be shown to Justice Stevens was procedural regularity and some claim that the proposed project served some "public benefit."

Astute readers will quickly note that the phrase "public benefit" is far broader than the constitutional words "public use."...

[OESY]

Mr. Epstein is a professor of law at the University of Chicago and a senior fellow of the Hoover Institution.

[OESY]

John Edwards claims to speak for the little guy who has no voice.
But when the government wants to expand at the expense of the little guy
who is forced from his home and not given compensation adequate to
buy a home of comparable value, John Edwards looks the other way.
For Edwards, it will always be that more tax revenue trumps justice.

[proxy_user]

What does Edwards have to do with this? He's a lawyer, not a judge on the Supreme Court.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

'swhy we need a new court is the worst way. 'salso why Frist needs a backbone and Capt. Queeg needs a kick in the shins.

[Ragnorak]

One obvious compromise position...

Compromise? This is the Constitution. Either there is a prohibition on the government taking private land for private use -- the redistribution of private property -- or there isn't.

A compromise setting some arbitrary threshold for violating the fifth amendment is no better. It is only more consistent with past Supreme Court practices of using case law to build on case law to slowly abolish liberties rather than doing it all in one shot.

[Sam Cree]

bookmark

[snowsislander]

Other than the New York Times, and national mayoral and municipal bodies, I think that pretty much all national level figures who have spoken out have condemned this odious decision.

However, where are the national political figures? I don't even seen the RNC making a peep; in fact, I just went to the RNC's website, and here is what they are running currently on their News page:

News Room/News Feed  < Home  	
	June 24, 2005
In Case You Missed It: A Party Without Ideas
	June 23, 2005
Declaraciones del Presidente del RNC Ken Mehlman sobre las Críticas por los Demócratas de Karl Rove
	June 23, 2005
Declaraciones de Hoy del Presidente del RNC, Ken Mehlman, en la Conferencia de la Asociación Nacional de Gobernantes Latinos
	June 23, 2005
RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman Statement On The Democrat Attacks Of Karl Rove
	June 23, 2005
Remarks By The President In A Conversation On Strengthening Social Security
	June 22, 2005
Remarks By The President On Energy And Economic Security
	June 16, 2005
Remarks By The President On Medicare
	June 16, 2005
Remarks By The President At The National Hispanic Prayer Breakfast
	June 14, 2005
Remarks By The President At 2005 President's Dinner
	June 23, 2005
Declaraciones del Presidente del RNC Ken Mehlman sobre las Críticas por los Demócratas de Karl Rove
	June 23, 2005
Declaraciones de Hoy del Presidente del RNC, Ken Mehlman, en la Conferencia de la Asociación Nacional de Gobernantes Latinos
	June 23, 2005
RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman Statement On The Democrat Attacks Of Karl Rove
	June 23, 2005
RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman's Remarks Today At The National Association Of Latino Elected Officials (NALEO) Conference
	June 22, 2005
RNC Saca Nuevo Aviso de Internet que Destaca la Descabellada Retórica de los Demócratas
	June 16, 2005
The President Promotes New Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit
	June 9, 2005
The Patriot Act Helps Keep America Safe
	June 6, 2005
Promoting Freedom And Democracy In This Hemisphere
	June 3, 2005
Strengthening Social Security For Rural America
	May 24, 2005
Valuing Life Through Embryo Adoption And Ethical Stem Cell Research

What the dickens is all of this Spanish stuff doing on News on there? Spanish is not an official language of the U.S. and I would be disappointed to find it represented as an official language of the Republican Party.

And not word one about the eminent domain case.

[zerosix]

Nope but he sure does speak for American Trial Lawyers, who endorse government rights over personal rights, where money is involved (as is the usual case) and he might have been our Vice President and now awaits his turn for either President or V.President, under whatever game plan gets him to the top.

[Condor51]

This odious decision by SCOTUS will lead to violence - it's inevitable.

Some mega-bucks developer will try to take grandpa Jones house and grandpa will pull out the Mossberg when the 1st bulldozer arrives.