[26lemoncharlie]

Teddy has a 4 million dollar home in DC, What a Hotel that would make!!! Let's get some investments going !!

[Paleo Conservative]

So, the hotel would have the "Just Desserts Cafe,"

[Paleo Conservative]

I figured out another menu item.

Revenge, a dish best served cold.

[Paleo Conservative]

So if this proposal were accepted by the local government, and Souter fought it, would the entire Supreme Court have to recuse itself?

[doug from upland]

I was going to write him a LETTER OF INTENT for a purchase and let him know that, if he didn't sell, we would get it condemned and deduct our costs for such action. Should I make it about $75,000?

[backlash]

Lots of great ideas have been offered concerning Souters' property, but why stop there? Four other justices colluded with him to strip American citizens of their rights and should rightly face the same music. This should also apply to the various city fathers moving ahead with their now legal land grabs.

[Navy Patriot]

I hope this goes far enough to force the town selectmen to vote on this proposal for two reasons: 1) If they vote to take, Souter will have to use equal protection to attempt to stop the taking. If successful, Souter will force the elimination of takings in that entire district, as equal protection also makes ALL citizens equal to Souter. 2) If they vote not to take all citizens again will get equal treatment and there will be no takings in the entire district. The town is between a rock and a hard place, the only way out is to take and have Souter lose his petition at SCOTUS with himself recused.

[holyscroller]

Pictures! Pictures! Let's see what our future hotel site looks like.

[AmishDude]

Why does everybody think that Souter would mind? Before ED stretched into the area of private land for private land, people often sold when a developer came to town. The problem was usually with a woman in her 70s or 80s who didn't want to bother with the sale and relocation. I don't know why everybody is so sure he'd fight this.

It feels nice, but I'm not sure it will have the desired effect.

[driftless]

Even my ultra-liberal, lawyer daughter-in-law, who has a shrine to Ginsburg in her home (just kidding, but I would not be surprised to see a picture of Ginsburg on her office desk), called the decision awful. She simply couldn't believe that her lib heroes had voted for it. She confessed that this is the only time she agreed with Scalia on anything.

[Man50D]

Here is a link to the Freestar Media website if anyone wants to support the Lost Liberty Hotel project.

Freestar Media

[thegreatbeast]

I believe that when Souter was appointed to the court he was either living with his mother or had recently lost her and was still living in the family manse. (BTW: Souter was the work of John Sunnunu, 41's Chief of Staff and father of the man who unseated Bob Smith, a genuine conservative.)

The Lost Liberty Hotel is a great idea.

[Bob from NH]

I live in Weare, NH and something doesn't add up here. I pay over 4,000 in annual property taxes for a 2-bedroom ranch on 6 acres.

I have not checked with the assessor's office yet, but if the reports are true (~2,400 in taxes for a 34 acre lot with a 2-story colonial farm house) then either Souter isn't pay his fair share of taxes and needs to be reassessed, or his property is in current use, probably with the 20% reduction for recreational uses. If this is true, you are all welcome to come up to Weare to fish, hunt, snowshoe and observe nature on Souter's property and no one can stop you!

Here is a web-site that has more information on current use land http://weareweb.weare.nh.us/onrecord

[FReethesheeples]

Bump. Thanks for this post. Bravo! I wrote to the guy initaiting this measure (taking Souter's houjse for the Lost Liberty Htoel) offering to invest! I think he was swamped!

It is great to see Americans so aware of, & energized in defense of, private property rights by addressing threats, this terrible precedent (Kelo v. New London), and becoming aware of the downside of activist Judges. I have been concerned with both of these realted issues for about a decade. I even had brief, separate, conversational encounters with two of the "good" Justices (Scalia & Thomas) in the Kelo case about 6 or 7 years ago re: "The Takings Clause" of the 5th Amendment designed to protect private property from arbitrary seizures, but providing for Eminent Domain for certain "public use" (NOT "public purpose") . It was clear they were anxious to see some good cases walk toward them. I doubt if they would have predicted the bizarre outcome in Kelo, though.

For those of us who are deeply concerned with protection of Private Property from improper application of Eminent Domain in contravention of the Original Intent of the Founders in the 5th Amendment's Takings Clause, I am registering a warning or a concern:

I think AG (& potential USSC Nominee) Alberto Gonzales is very weak on Private Property Rights and lacks an understanding of orignainl intent of the 5th Amendment's Takings Clause (Eminent Domain) based both upon some cases when he ws at the texas Supreme Ct. (e.g., FM Properties Operating Co. v. City of Austin, 22 S.W.3d 868 (Tex. 2000))

and, more recently and significantly, upon his NOT having joined in the Kelo case on the side of property owner. My understanding ws that he had sided with the League of Cities against Kelo while WH Counsel.

As some have frequently observed, he certainly believes in a "Living Constitution" and is NOT a strict constructionist or an Originalist, but rather tends toward the Activist side, per National Review Online and others.

He has been sharply critical of Priscilla Owen in some Texas Supreme Ct. decisions when they were both on that Ct. as Justices, and he has been quoted as being sharply criticial fo Janice Rogers Brown, including being quoted by People for the American Way in their ultra-leftist propaganda.