Skip to comments.
Property-rights dispute
The Washington Times ^
| July 17, 2007
| Sonya D. Jones and John R. Lott Jr.
Posted on 07/17/2007 5:48:39 AM PDT by 3AngelaD
Retirees Shirley and Herbert Leu had a problem. Part of their backyard was collapsing into a ditch that ran along the U.S.-Canadian border. Before building their 4-foot-high retaining wall, the Leus made sure they were in compliance with all local regulations...It never dawned on the Leus that this would lead to an international incident and an ideological battle over private property. The debate became one of whether an international commission could simply come onto their property, remove their wall and then send them the bill.
The controversy escalated to soap opera proportions with the Departments of State and Justice as well as the White House opposing the International Boundary Commission's (IBC) edict and President Bush last week stepping in and firing the U.S. representative on the commission. Apparently, this is the first time that a president has ever fired such a commissioner.
For his part, the fired commissioner, Dennis Schornack, claims that once appointed he has the job for life and cannot be fired. He is vowing to fight his firing in court. The IBC claims authority to enter and take the Leus' private property under a treaty between the United States and Canada...
To put it mildly, the Leus were shocked. After all, their retaining wall stands about 8 feet from the actual border andwell within their property line."[Mr. Schornack] was so rude, and so abrupt, standing and telling me he had the power to take the wall down and that if I got a lawyer, he'd win..."
To Mr. Schornack, the dispute is largely one of too much fealty to property rights.... Mr. Schornack and the IBC actually responded that they are not a government agency and are therefore not subject to the laws of the United States and its Constitution....
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism
KEYWORDS: johnlott; propertyrights; sonyajones; takingsclause
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-52 next last
To: agere_contra
they are not a government agency and are therefore not subject to the laws of the United States and its Constitution
This is exactly why the SPP is so dangerous.
21
posted on
07/17/2007 6:26:59 AM PDT
by
hedgetrimmer
(I'm a billionaire! Thanks WTO and the "free trade" system!--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
To: Issaquahking
Dennis Schornack was appointed by President Bush to his position in 2001 (he assumed office in 2002), and previously headed the Strategic Inititives office of Michigan Governor John Engler, a conservative Republican. The lawyer hired by Schornack is John MacKay, who was one of the U.S. Federal Prosecutors forced to resign by the White House.
22
posted on
07/17/2007 6:29:16 AM PDT
by
3AngelaD
(They screwed up their own countries so bad they had to leave, and now they're here screwing up ours)
To: Leatherneck_MT
Read this AFTER you take any BP medication, please
23
posted on
07/17/2007 6:29:51 AM PDT
by
Shimmer128
(But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself. Kipling)
To: 3AngelaD
"The thought that an international commission could simply order the wall removed at the expense of the owners was beyond anything that the couple had anticipated."No kidding?
Change the laws so that, if removed, it is at the expense of the burocrats. That'll put a stop to their "idealism" fast!
24
posted on
07/17/2007 6:37:15 AM PDT
by
Savage Beast
("History is not just cruel. It is witty." ~Charles Krauthammer)
To: MarkL; 3AngelaD
To: Ben Ficklin
If you give Leus an exception, then you have to give everyone else an exception.
I think the point of the article is that neither the IBC nor that idiot Commissioner Arnold Horshack have the power to take private property, hence there is no exception.
26
posted on
07/17/2007 6:48:48 AM PDT
by
bikerMD
(Beware, the light at the end of the tunnel may be a muzzle flash.)
To: VeniVidiVici
Exactly. Since when are private property rights an exception to anything?
To: 3AngelaD
That’s just scary beyond measure.
To: 3AngelaD
Dennis Schornack, claims that once appointed he has the job for life and cannot be fired So, what you're saying is that when your life is over, you relinquish the job. Easy enough to fix that.
29
posted on
07/17/2007 6:58:26 AM PDT
by
Malsua
To: hocndoc
That treaty the IBC relies upon for its authority does not actually authorize the regulation of that 20-foot-wide zone.
I spent a few minutes searching through their website and their provided links as well as and independent google search of "1960 international boundary commission act" (where I got only a single hit - to their website!) and could find nothing but their "interpretation", ie 20 ft. Have you found any source documents?
To: 3AngelaD
Shornack may be an idiot. However...
"To put it mildly, the Leus were shocked. After all, their retaining wall stands about 8 feet from the actual border and well within their property line"
Obtaining Permission for Construction
To perform any type of work on the 20 feet(6 metre) wide vista along the boundary, a letter of authorization by the commissioners is required. Work is defined in Section 2 of the International Boundary Commission Act, R.S.C. 1985, c1-16, as: "Any ditch, earthwork, building or structure of any description or any lines of telephone, telegraph or power, including posts, piers or abutments for sustaining or protecting the wires or cables of those lines."
Seems the Leus should have looked into what it means to own property along the border. By treaty, it is managed 20 feet on either side by this commission, which was created in 1908.
All that said, Shornack could have handled things a bit more diplomatically and that may be reason enough to fire him, but he appears to be acting within the bounds of the law with respect to the area near the border.
31
posted on
07/17/2007 7:06:49 AM PDT
by
chrisser
To: 3AngelaD
Any job where one can’t be fired from, shouldn’t exist.
32
posted on
07/17/2007 7:08:33 AM PDT
by
JRochelle
(Vacant Lott needs to be evicted from the Senate.)
To: caveat emptor
From here: http://www.canlii.org/ca/sta/i-16/sec5.html (these are Canadian government documents, BTW)
"Construction of works
5. Except with the permission of the Commission, no person shall
(a) construct or place within ten feet of the boundary any work or any addition to a work; or
(b) enlarge any work that was on July 6, 1960 within ten feet of the boundary.
R.S., c. I-19, s. 5. "
33
posted on
07/17/2007 7:10:36 AM PDT
by
chrisser
To: chrisser
FWIW, I can’t find any U.S. equivalent law online that codifies the powers of this commission.
34
posted on
07/17/2007 7:17:12 AM PDT
by
chrisser
To: NY.SS-Bar9
35
posted on
07/17/2007 7:19:39 AM PDT
by
badgerlandjim
(Hillary Clinton is to politics as Helen Thomas is to beauty)
To: caveat emptor
36
posted on
07/17/2007 7:23:44 AM PDT
by
hocndoc
(http://ccgoporg.blogspot.com/)
To: MarkL
I've read this article a few times, and I really don't understand the claims of this "commission."
That is because the article is an editorial, and one of its authors is a lawyer for the Pacific Legal Foundation, which has represented the property owner. So the co-author has a vested interest in presenting only one side of the case, which is conveniently not disclosed.
37
posted on
07/17/2007 7:29:31 AM PDT
by
drjimmy
To: hocndoc
Evidently, its 10 feet on either side, and has been for a while. http://www.internationalboundarycommission.org/ibcpg2.htm
Yeah, I found that right off the bat, but that's just their interpretation of the act. I guess I should have been more precise in my question to you. Instead of "source documents" I should have asked about "original documents".
To: chrisser
“To put it mildly, the Leus were shocked. After all, their retaining wall stands about 8 feet from the actual border and well within their property line”
From this description it is still unclear to me as to where the retaining wall is. If this were me making this statement as a property owner I think I would be saying that the wall is 8 feet from the edge of the 20 foot border, that is 18 feet from the center of the swath. Not eight feet from the exact middle.
39
posted on
07/17/2007 7:40:53 AM PDT
by
RC30
To: hocndoc; chrisser
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-52 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson