[RoyalsFan]

I hope the people of New London rise up and don't let private developers take their land despite the U.S. supreme court decision.

[Man50D]

The city of New London wants to pay the property owners the value of their homes at the time the city tried to implement eminent domain in 2000 not the current value and the city argues property owners maybe liable for use and occupancy fees as they have been living on eminent domain land as tenants free of charge since 2000. This would further reduce any money the property owners receive from the city. New London property values now at issue in eminent domain

[Grut]

Nothing the city or NLDC did in carrying out their responsibilities deviated from the rights imposed on citizens.

WTF?

[junta]

Names and pictures of the city council should be widely distributed as well as the developers and financeers of this despotic nonsense. Our small town almost got a low income housing project built by a multi-millionaire developer who like his bit of socialism, but the death threats got to him and he decided that police protection is not good for his mobbed up business.

[TheForceOfOne]

Has anyone asked them to resign or asked for a recall election to replace those who have the power to let this Eminent Domain case move forward?

Take the power away from those who do not reflect the will of the people. Let them know that if they follow through with this they are finished politically and socially within New London.

[nutmeg]

Connecticut ping!

Please Freepmail me if you want on or off my infrequent Connecticut ping list.

[FReethesheeples]

Bump. Thanks for this post.

For those of us who are deeply concerned with protection of Private Property from improper application of Eminent Domain in contravention of the Original Intent of the Founders in the 5th Amendment's Takings Clause, I am registering a warning or a concern:

I think AG (& potential USSC Nominee) Alberto Gonzales is very weak on Private Property Rights and lacks an understanding of orignainl intent of the 5th Amendment's Takings Clause (Eminent Domain) based both upon some cases when he ws at the texas Supreme Ct. (e.g., FM Properties Operating Co. v. City of Austin, 22 S.W.3d 868 (Tex. 2000))

and, more recently and significantly, upon his NOT having joined in the Kelo case on the side of property owner. My understanding ws that he had sided with the League of Cities against Kelo while WH Counsel.

As some have frequently observed, he certainly believes in a "Living Constitution" and is NOT a strict constructionist or an Originalist, but rather tends toward the Activist side, per National Review Online and others.

He has been sharply critical of Priscilla Owen in some Texas Supreme Ct. decisons when they were both on that Ct. as Justices, and he has been quoted as being sharply criticial fo Janice Rogers Brown, including being quoted by People for the American Way in their ultra-leftist propaganda.