High Court: Govts Can Take Property for Econ Development

Bloomberg News

[Helmholtz]

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

[redgolum]

Grandfather rights exist at the whim of the zoning agency.

Correct. The county (or city) zoning board has the most power of any entity of local government. They can, and have, decided to destroy residential zones.

[Eagle Eye]

The tree of liberty is certainly thirsty, isn't it?

[jwalsh07]

In the case of the Congress, there would be federalism questions (which I think valid) but it's difficult to see how it wouldn't fit into the Commerce Clause as interpreted by the Court (wrongly, in my opinion, but so it is).

Aieeeeeeeeeeee! Enough. Impeachment or an Amendment.

[subterfuge]

With all due respect, why is this news?

This has been going on for some time at the local level. In Daytona Beach FL the local gov condemned the whole Boardwalk so they could take away the land from people who'd had it in their families for generations to give it to developers. Also for the "common good."

Trouble is, it's also for the "common bad" of our country.

[Squantos]

This is some BS ain't it EE........robbery is now legal is my take on this.

[jwalsh07]

Parched EE, parched.

[redgolum]

Aquifers can be recharged, it just takes so long as to not be feasible to plan for.

I used to work in eastern New Mexico and west Texas. Driving around you would see a bunch of old abandoned farms and orchards. Great place to grow fruit, very little bad weather, as long as you have the water.

I never quite understood why people always think they can have a lawn in the desert.

[processing please hold]

Fresh water?

Yep.

[Jim Verdolini]

"This is the worst day in the history of this country since September 11th"

You forget the Campaign Finance Decision that eliminated the First Amendment. Now they whacked the 5th.

I fear what is next. The court has no regard for the Constitution or the restraints that the thing places on the court. Our Robed Masters want to be free to do whatever they desire.

[jw777]

does anyone know how to get the vote count? dissenting?

[sauropod]

I see you are living up to your screenname.

"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not for your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen." --Samuel Adams, 1776

[Wicket]

The decision is a breathtakingly bad one. I believe there's a Chinese curse - May you live in interesting times. Well, this is certainly an interesting time for our nation and its citizens - Heaven help us all.

[AntiGuv]

You'll get no argument from me. During the interim, GWB should make a point of nominating the type of judges & justices who will reverse this decision if all else fails.

[RightWhale]

why is this news

Any SCOTUS decision is news.

[unseen]

You have to be joking right. The 535 people that are bought and paid for by big business are going to vote to curtail the rights of the people that pay for their perks? Yeh when pigs fly. This has to be a local challenge. We must get the local laws set up right so this can not happen and work the way up to the sate then the federal level only with a grass roots campaign will this be reversed

[TheSpottedOwl]

That would mean the local government? I just moved back up here, and I don't like what I see. Our situation is understandable, but I am worried about the future. I guess the smart thing to do is to attend all the city council meetings, and find out what is going on. I rent, but sh*t rolls downhill.

[Black Tooth]

Yeah, right. This is the president running around blathering about how US taxpayers must have their money stolen to "increase liberty" in foreign countries, while he increases subsidies, grows government, cooks up stupid "free" pill vote-buying scams and assaults the First Amendment.

I was thinking the exact thing as I read through these posts.

[blueriver]

The Supreme Court has ruled that the U.S. Constitution does not prevent local governments from seizing property for this reason.

Yes so according to the court it is constitutionally OK to seize property in this manner. So what would prevent a developer from challenging the constitutionality of a law that prohibits such seizure.

[janetjanet998]

all the liberal/socilists judges voted for it of course