Nowhere in “Kelo” does it give the “state” the authority to seize federal property through eminent domain.
And nowhere in the Constitution does it give an “inferior” court the authority to hear a “case” involving a “State”. Since the inferior court is acting without constitutional authority, so should the State.
Article 3. section 2
In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction.
Why is it so hard for people to understand this when it is written in Plain English?? Just because the court refuses to abide by what is written in the Constitution, does not mean a State has to go along with it. Force the Issue.