High Court: Govts Can Take Property for Econ Development

Bloomberg News

[Helmholtz]

U.S. Supreme Court says cities have broad powers to take property.

[liberty2004]

All the judges who sided with this should be hung by the neck until dead, have their house(s) burned to the ground, the ground salted and their families driven into the wilderness.

Our Founders would be proud of your spirit. They would be in agreement with you. This is truly a sad day for this Republic. This is a landmark decision.

[investigateworld]

While I don't partake of the 'weed', there are somethings the states have best reserved for themselves. Amazing, me a Charter Member of the VRWC, agreeing with DU twice in less than two months.
(I think I picked a bad week to give up huffing glue)

[jwalsh07]

I don't think so. Big Development and Big Retail are OVERWHELMINGLY Republicans and they speak with $500,000 checks. This is going to put the GOP between its core constituents and its core corporations. Somehow, I don't think you guys will win...

First of all, the dems got 4 times as much 527 money in the last cycle. And second of all 1 millionaire gets one vote, one million property owners get one million votes. You will see pols from both parties running from "Big Development and Big Retail" like their ass was on fire if this issue takes hold in the general public.

[Craven Moorhead]

LOL

I'm sure this issue will be here tomorrow.
I'm out.

[Craven Moorhead]

Lobbyists and the two-party system. It doesn't matter WHO wins, politicos answer to the lobbies that are wining and dining them. I've lived long enough to know that what it takes to win an election and what is actually done after it is won are two very different things...

[Just A Nobody]

Indy? I was the top debater on the team for Goldwater when I was in Jr. Hi. An Ohioan until recently.

[Craven Moorhead]

I'm out

Good night all.

[jwalsh07]

Either the tune changed or the key you were playing it in. You claimed politicos would listen to the money men regarding ED. My claim is that a groundswell will cause them to toss the money men over in a heartbeat. A gorundswell is a distinct possibility, especially if the President takes this opportunity to use the bully pulpit and advocate for conservative judges and justices. Think of it, "Ladies and Gentlemen this is the reason I've been trying to confirm judges who will adhere to a strict reading of the laws and the Constitution. What you've seen in the SCOTUS vis a vis property rights in CT is liberals on the court gone wild and what you've been seeing in Congress is liberals fillibustering the judges who will protect your private property rights."

You agree or disagree? :-}

[Calpernia]

If he seized the site, that would take the control away from IFC.

[RebelTex]

From another thread:

"Did you see the thread on DU? Talking about a truce with FR over this..."

You've GOT to be kidding, right?

If they are upset, too, then maybe we could start a petition to congress and invite those at DU to sign with us.

One of our legal eagle FReepers, (one that has plenty of Constitutional and legislative legal experience), should write the petition (even without DU support, still needs to be done).  IMHO, it should include:

1. Demand for impeachment of the 5 anti-American Justices.
2. Demand for restating (redefining and limiting) the power of the SC to strict construction of the Constitution.
3. Supporting property rights of citizens.
4. Outlawing ALL eminent domain laws, federal and state, except where extraordinary circumstances exist to protect public health and safety (but not EPA type situations) and then only very limited and narrowly defined.
5. Outlawing all forfeiture, seizure, and confiscation laws.
6. Demand to change Senate rules to prevent filibusters of Presidential appointments and make it LAW.

If I've left out anything, add your own thoughts, or offer changes and explanation if you've got good reasons.  Keep it specific to property rights and the SC - don't want to chase off any DU support - that is, if they have finally started to wake up.

[Age of Reason]

The decision today is the result of America's bloating population growth from immigration.

They will make room for all those immigrants by seizing single family homes to use the land for apartment buildings or food production or natural resources or shopping centers.

That's how they intend to house and supply the half-billion-plus people they plan to pack into this country by mid century.

Living in a single family home on your own plot of land will come to be seen as selfish.

And no one will care when they come to take it away from you for the "public good."

[Rockitz]

Around Indianapolis many years ago the state siezed farmland to build reservoirs to supply the city. Of course eventually the best property in the Indianapolis area to build houses was around these reservoirs. I'm sure the farmers would have loved to have gotten a tenth of what the water company got for those properties. There should be some profit sharing in this decision somewhere.

[Coleus]

yep, then maybe he should give it a try.

[Calpernia]

Ok, I'll coordinate with Debbie tomorrow. Thanks.

[HarryCaul]

All your property are belong to SCOTUS.

[Squantos]

Iraq is having trouble creating a constitution......may as well send em ours as our polidiots and their judical whores ain't using it......

[Wampus SC]

"Proving once again that the supreme court justices do not understand the Constitution, or they feel it is "elastic.""

Yeah, but today they stretched the elastic so far it broke.

Game over, folks. Country's gone. Serf City, here we come!

[AnimalLover]

Perhaps it is time to review the following:


CURRENT COMMUNIST GOALS

http://www.uhuh.com/nwo/communism/comgoals.htm

[Wampus SC]

I'm late to the thread, and doubt I'll say anything that hasn't been said, but I gotta rant. Nothing has ever made me as angry as this. Nothing. We had to fight a war over this issue once. Are those who forget and ignore history doomed to be the reincarnation of King George III?

When the government can take your private property anytime it wants to and for any reason it trumps up, then there's no private property. The difference between this and Communism is -- wait! - other than the fact that the government isn't calling it communism, there is no difference.

This is the worst thing that has happened in US history. 6/23/2005 is the day the US fell to Communism, from within, without a shot. In the 30's some Communist writers described how the lure of $$$$ to be made in a capitalist system could be turned against capitalism itself, and make it fall into socialism. Today, SCOTUS validated those ideas, and implemented their plan for them. How? Why? Too many of us were just "asleep at the switch", as the cliche goes.

Well, goodnight fellow freepers. It had a good run, and was fun while it lasted. Let's all now apologize to Ben Franklin - because we sure couldn't keep it.

[Joe Brower]

Appears that this article is much more germane to our present situation that most here on this forum would care to think about, much less admit. How much evidence does one need? Welcome to "Post-Constitutional America".

How Tyranny Came to America