Posted on 01/08/2002 8:45:17 PM PST by passionfruit
Edited on 04/14/2004 10:04:57 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
WASHINGTON -- In a case that could curb environmental regulation, the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday weighed whether the federal government must compensate hundreds of land owners in Lake Tahoe, Nev., who have waited decades for approval to build lakeside homes.
(Excerpt) Read more at ocregister.com ...
I love Ted Olson, and I hurt thinking about the loss of his lovely wife Barbara, but he came down on the wrong side of this issue.. I hope the views of Sandra DaO'Conner win the day.
Mr. Olson is either incompetent or he deliberately made a false analogy.
Building permits and zoning laws aren't Federal cases, the situation in Tahoe is. The United States Congress passed these 'regulations', so that puts this case squarely in SCOTUS perview.
Perhaps Mr. Olson is being clever, and deliberately arguing a position he knows SCOTUS will reject.
Hey, I can hope can't I?
L
It is an unbearable burden that the government has placed on citizens. They strip their rights of the land then say deal with it without offering one dime in compensation. If environmentalists and people in authority are going to continue to do this without compensation you might as well toss the 5th Amendment out of the Constitution. Heck who cares about the Bill of Rights, it is just a nice idea right? (gag)
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.