High Court: Govts Can Take Property for Econ Development

Bloomberg News

[nuffsenuff]

I'm not surprised in the least by this list.

[IrishCatholic]

I will have to read this opinion from the court web site. It violates just about everything this country was founded on. If the Republicans don't grow a pair over this and rearrange the courts, then they are as bad as the dems.
I say no to socialism forever. When I get the decision in it's entirety and lower my blood pressure enough, I will write all of my representatives from the President on down to the county commissioner. It's time to bring the socialists to heel.

[bvw]

A black day by the signatures of those five.

[AntiGuv]

In fact, check this out: Supreme Court Rules Cities May Seize Homes

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who has been a key swing vote on many cases before the court, issued a stinging dissent. She argued that cities should not have unlimited authority to uproot families, even if they are provided compensation, simply to accommodate wealthy developers.

FWIW, O'Connor is liberal mainly on a handful of social issues, in particular abortion, which tends to get her vilified more than perhaps she should overall.

[MamaTexan]

While the opinion by Justice John Paul Stevens said that a local government could not take homeowners' property "simply to confer a private benefit on a particular private party," the New London. Conn., project involved in this case was "a carefully considered development plan." While the resulting project would not be open for use by the general public, the Court said, there is no literal requirement of that outcome.

_____________________________________________________________________

"When rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them."
Miranda ~vs~ Arizona, 384 US 436 p. 491.

"When all government, in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the Center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated."
– Thomas Jefferson

Government, in my humble opinion, should be formed to secure and to enlarge the exercise of the natural rights of its members; and every government, which has not this in view, as its principal object, is not a government of the legitimate kind.
Justice James Wilson, a signer of the Declaration, the Constitution, Original Justice on the U. S. Supreme Court, and the father of the first organized legal training in America.

________________________________________________________________________

It's official, we now have an ILLEGITIMATE government.

So that leaves one question......

Is it time YET???

[So Cal Rocket]

To the rooftops!!

[AntiGuv]

That should be David Souter of course (mind seizure!)

[Horatio Gates]

WTH!

[rwfromkansas]

ick....and 6-3 as well.

We really need 2 new conservatives on that court.

Eminent domain was not intended for Wal-Mart.

[Dat Mon]

This is a terrible SCOTUS ruling.

With this...local and state governments will now feel justified in pushing the envelope even further in eminent domain. A related result is that big developers will now court local officials big time...look at the potential paybacks on this...and little possible risk.

Somebody please post the vote breakdown on this issue if you know it.

One more reason why replacing Rehnquist with anyone other that a true conservative would be disastrous...look at what we have now.

[B Knotts]

The worst of it is, even if we shift the court somewhat soon, Scalia will cite this ruling as precedent.

As others have said, property rights are now dead and buried.

And the Fifth Amendment might as well never have been written.

[AntiGuv]

The irony is that three of the five justices were nominated by Republicans (Ford, Reagan, Bush).

[Mad Dawgg]

"High Court: Govts Can Take Property for Econ Development

High Court: Government Decides Govts Can Take Property for Econ Development

[Carry_Okie]

"The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God ... (then) anarchy and tyranny commence. Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist.." -- John Adams

[applpie]

if the courts cant get this right, then we NEED A LAW!!!

[SmithL]

This is SO wrong.

[rwfromkansas]

Oh...oops.

It is actually 5-4. I guess the SCOTUS blog was wrong.

Well, we still need ONE new conservative on the court, and two would be really helpful.

[Uncle Vlad]

Why worry about terrorists anymore? The country is over as we know it.

[rattrap]

Disgusting. All the judges who sided with this should have their house(s) replaced with a damn walmart.