[Pontiac]

Exactly

Unless SF is going to compensate the store for their losses they can’t stop them from closing.

There is the “Takings” clause in the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.

"nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

These Libs that are so much smarter than everyone else should know this.

And what about the risk of life and limb to the employees. Is the city going to indemnify the store for injury or death of the employees that may injured or killed during robbery?

[Codeflier]

You think we still live in a paradigm where the constitution matters?

[gitmo]

There is the “Takings” clause in the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.

How quaint.

[Nuc 1.1]

There is the “Takings” clause in the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." These Libs that are so much smarter than everyone else should know this.

They do know this, they just don't care. Plenty of fascist federal courts will be happy to uphold their actions.

[Thommas]

There is the “Takings” clause in the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.

Alas, California has been wiping its figurative backside with the Constitution for years.

Whenever it consciously enacts an unConstitutional law, it does so with full knowledge that, with cooperation of
the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, the law will be litigated for decades.