the words have different meanings. from cambridge.
Purpose: noun: The reason for which something is done or created or for which something exists: the purpose of the meeting is to appoint a trustee the building is no longer needed for its original purpose
Use: noun: The action of using something or the state of being used for some purpose: a member of staff is present when the pool is in use theater owners were charging too much for the use of their venues
Railroads have a unique history in the US. but i do not believe that eminent domain can be used to transfer ownership from a citizen to another citizen. if it is taken by eminent domain is is available to be used by everyone. easements should be negotiable by the persons involved in the establishment of the easement. most utilities started out as private and worked thru the basic property rights associated. Gas companies ran pipes under streets etc because the streets had been taken by cities. Just beacuse it was done doesn’t make it right or constitutional.
A highway or school is a public use. A Pfizer plant in New London, CT or a limosuine parking lot for a billionaire's casino is NOT a public use.
The problem with Kelo is that it establishes that the Takings Clause has no limits whatsoever. In effect what that means is that the government can make up whatever excuse it wants to take your property. One of the definitions of tyranny is the inconsistency and caprice of its laws. By establishing no limits at all in Kelo, the decision allows government at all levels to make up whatever definitions they want for the word public use, and there is no legal process (at least at the federal level) to protest. By using the argument that creating jobs and increased tax revenue with new proprietors of the private property (as opposed to the rightful, original owners) is a public use gives all power to the state in an arbitrary and caprecious manner.
I can't believe we're have to rehash the demerits of Kelo 10 years after the fact to actual Freepers. I never thought the Trump phenomenom would turn so-called conservatives into low information voters, who don't know or don't care to actually research the case and its Constitutional justifications (or in this case, its lack thereof).
“Just because it was done doesn’t make it right or constitutional.”
That’s insane. If something was clearly understood by the Founders to be constitutional, and found by every Supreme Court to be constitutional from then until now, of course it’s constitutional. It may not be “right” but I thought the “conservative” position was if people don’t think the Constitution as originally written is “right” about something, the response is not to have judges redefine it willy-nilly, but to pass a constitutional amendment about it.
Railroads are not the exception that proves the rule. The Supreme Court has never imposed limits on how governmental entities can define public use for purposes of the Fifth Amendment.