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

To: 4ConservativeJustices
Ya think? The US Supreme Court disagreed.

There are, without doubt, occasions in which private property may lawfully be taken possession of or destroyed to prevent it from falling into the hands of the public enemy; and also where a military officer, charged with a particular duty, may impress private property into the public service or take it for public use. Unquestionably, in such cases, the government is bound to make full compensation to the owner.

When did the Supreme Court -explicitly- disavow, or even speak to, the Emancipation Proclamation?

Walt

329 posted on 08/20/2003 2:08:57 PM PDT by WhiskeyPapa (Virtue is the uncontested prize.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 307 | View Replies ]


To: WhiskeyPapa
When did the Supreme Court -explicitly- disavow, or even speak to, the Emancipation Proclamation?

It's not fortune-telling, or predicting the future. The court address seizure of property: 'Unquestionably, in such cases, the government is bound to make full compensation to the owner.'

Understand that?

330 posted on 08/20/2003 2:21:47 PM PDT by 4CJ (Come along chihuahua, I want to hear you say yo quiero taco bell. - Nolu Chan, 28 Jul 2003)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 329 | 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