Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Red Badger

This is unconstitutional.


13 posted on 11/25/2020 8:51:45 AM PST by Hostage (Article V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Hostage
What's the Constitution between friends?

If the Democrats get control of the Senate, there would be nothing to stop this from becoming law (unless they think it would hurt them politically with the other 87% of the population).

40 posted on 11/25/2020 9:02:28 AM PST by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: Hostage
This is unconstitutional.

Uncle Sugar purchases the land on the free and open market, then bequeaths it to blacks via some variation of the antiquated Homestead Act.

47 posted on 11/25/2020 9:04:11 AM PST by gloryblaze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: Hostage

The Fifth Amendment protects the right to private property in two ways. First, it states that a person may not be deprived of property by the government without “due process of law,” or fair procedures. In addition, it sets limits on the traditional practice of eminent domain, such as when the government takes private property to build a public road. Under the Fifth Amendment, such takings must be for a “public use” and require “just compensation” at market value for the property seized. But in Kelo v. City of New London (2005), the Supreme Court interpreted public use broadly to include a “public purpose” of economic development that might directly benefit private parties. In response, many state legislatures passed laws limiting the scope of eminent domain for public use.


71 posted on 11/25/2020 9:18:19 AM PST by DownInFlames (Ga)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson