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

To: Tax-chick

The same applies to Michigan. Several years ago to Michigan Supreme Court ruled that the Michigan Constitution prohibits taking of private property for use by another private entity.


36 posted on 06/24/2005 9:11:22 AM PDT by CharacterCounts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]


To: CharacterCounts

Here's the Michigan SC decision -

The Michigan Supreme Court has ruled that local and state governments may not seize private property under their eminent domain power and give it to another private user.

In other words, the local government can’t take your home, land or business and give it to a strip mall, a car dealership, a high-tech company or any other private property owner.

The unanimous ruling on July 30, 2004 returned common sense to private property ownership, reined in political hacks stealing property to reward friends or well-heeled connections and built a clear wall between the legal concepts of private property and public use.

“We overrule Poletown,” the Court wrote, “in order to vindicate our constitution, protect the people’s property rights and preserve the legitimacy of the judicial branch as the expositor, not creator, of fundamental law.”

This statement indicates that Michigan’s highest court has rediscovered its constitutional and traditional role as interpreter of law, not creative writer of law.

The County of Wayne v. Hathcock ruling overturned the infamous Poletown decision made by the same court in 1981.


39 posted on 06/24/2005 9:26:54 AM PDT by sergeantdave (Marxism has not only failed to promote human freedom, it has failed to produce food)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | 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