Skip to comments.Tonight we are no longer a free country (vanity)
Posted on 06/23/2005 8:06:55 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants
Everybody knows about the shot that was heard around the world as the birthing pains of this once great nation. Today, sadly, we may have heard it's death knell.
It did not come with violence or shots fired. It came with the virtual elimination of personal property rights.
Our founding fathers knew how important the ownership of property was and sought to protect the right to be secure in the ownership of property to the extent that they enshrined the guarantee that property would not be taken for public use without due process and just compensation.
For over 200 years it was understood that "public use" meant that the ownership would transfer from the private owner to the local, state, or federal government for things such as military bases, roads, schools, prisons, etc. Now, the meaning of "public use" has been altered by 5 people who were never elected to office and in all reality, are completely unaccountable to anyone, to mean privately owned condos, shopping centers, and business parks under the thin guise that those enterprises would contribute more tax money to the coffers, thus increasing the "public good"
Justice Stevens, writing for the majority said that judges should give city councils and state legislatures "broad latitude in determining what public needs justify the use of the takings power," he added. To make sure that he wasn't misunderstood he added, "The city has carefully formulated a development plan that it believes will provide appreciable benefits to the community, including, but not limited to, new jobs and increased tax revenue," and just destroyed any pretence that you have any recourse whatsoever if the government or county decides that they want your property for any reason at all.
Sandra Day O'Connor writing a scathing dissent correctly said that now rich and politically land developers and businesses could basically take your land away from you with the help from the local government. Yes, you could fight it in court, but it is now fruitless as you are guaranteed to lose in a fixed fight.
For years the people have for the most party sat quietly as the government stole more and more freedoms from us. Prior to 1914 and fool could take any drug he or she wanted and kill themselves, thus increasing the quality of the gene pool for the rest of us. Before 1918, the government had no claim to your wages and could not tax them. Prior to 1934, Sears sold machine guns from their catalog and nobody thought anything about it. Prior to the 1950's preachers could freely endorse or denigrate any political candidate they wanted, just as had been done since the very first town government was formed in this country almost 350 years prior. Since 1986 it has been illegal to manufacture and sell a machine gun to a civilian despite the fact that in the past several decades the number of people int he US murdered by a person with a machine gun has been exactly one, and the person doing the shooting was a police officer using a gun issued to the police department.
But hope is not lost however, ownership of real property does a funny thing to people. It is a spot that a person can say, "This land is MINE!" with a dedication and a fierceness that is somewhat scary. Religion and politics and abortion and the WOT all take a back seat when two neighbors are faced with having their property stolen by the government.
Maybe that bell sounding isn't the death knell but the alarm.
Maybe this will awake the sheeple to realize that the socialist have gone too far.
Maybe the bell is just signalling round two of the Revolutionary War.
Will this war be fought with bullets or ballots?
We shall see.
The libs on the Court are gobbling up every bit of our freedom while they still can. They know their numbers will soon be altered. I keep thinking it can't get any worse but it does.
Serious issues like this one can be reversed with a Constitutional Amendment (I think) - I know, everyone thinks their issue is serious. This one is - it means any developer can enrich himself at your expense. There would be some case for this if most new development was an improvement - but more strip malls etc. we don't need.
And that doesn't even touch on the payoffs that already go on at city hall to get "things approved."
Or what about this scenario: your property is confiscated and after it's torn down and the foundation for the "improvement" has been poured, the developer suddenly goes belly up - with their gambler mentality and penchant for being over-extended this happens all the time.
It isn't only that these judges are libs or don't believe in private property - they really don't understand how real life proceeds.
Sorry for the incoherence - just a collection of thoughts generated by this latest "vehicle for mischief" on the part of the what is supposed to be our most supreme court.
Once Washington was re-elected for his second term as President, the jockeying began to see who would succeed him. Jefferson and Madison started rumor campaigns, Ben Franklin's grandson took potshots in the press...It reminded me very much of what has been going on since the 2004 election.
It's worth the price of the book to read Washington's description of Massachusetts politicians, LOL!
It's not for private use, only public use.
As sort of a sidebar, doesn't anyone think that this decision may have caused the 160 point DJIA selloff today?
I don't write 'em. I just quote 'em.
The shining city on the hill just got a bit more tarnished.
Substandard hyperbole is worse than "substandard wiring".
Appraise at highest and best use.
Tbilisi is calling.
Well, the Fifth Amendment, the heart of the Bill of Rights, is completely gutted now.
The 'life' clause died with Terri Schiavo, and now this.
It would seem that the first test for all future Supreme Court nominees should be a sixth grade level reading comprehension exam!
try answering a specific question. do you have a constitutional right to convert your house in the residential area its located in, and make it a nuclear waste dump or an adult bookstore? yes or no. or can the legislature regulate that?
My feelings exactly.
no. is was caused by the greenspan testimony and the senators (both R and D) talking about the china trade and currency crisis and the use of tariffs.
Your statement has nothing to do with the issue at hand.
Two things need to be done from what I can see. First call your representative and demand to talk to the legislative aid and make sure you have your copy of the Constitution in your hand for quick reference. Ask what they are going to do to over turn this.
Yes Congress does have that power especially when the ruling is obviously contrary to the constititution. The land must be taken for public use with just compensation not private corporate use (the public benefit does not even come into play). It is enumerated in the Constitution for the establishment of Post Offices, Post Roads, Forts, etc.
If you don't get a plan of action I suggest that you vote with your feet and your cash! Pick a Conservative Constitutional Party and go to your elections board and register as a member of that party. Donate your political cash to that party. Cut the Republicrats off at the source! If you can't make a Revolutionary move like this then we are indeed doomed because you would rather be a slave than do what our founding fathers did. I am a member of the America First Party, check them out but if that is not your cup of tea then perhaps the Constitution Party or the Independant American Party.
The Dance of distraction in the Senate has been going on for how long????? If this was not about distraction then the job would have been done already with respect to votes on all nominees. Filibuster with respect to nominees is unconstituional. The Borders are not sealed, the trade deficit is out of this world, the budget deficit is out of this world and now they take away a government for, by and of the people by seizing our property. Whether you have your property in your hands now is irrelevant they are coming for you. How long are you going to wait? Until there is no one to help you? Are you tired of the lesser of two evils yet?
Maybe you're right.
yes, that is exactly my point. the complaints here against zoning laws have nothing to do with this ruling today about eminent domain.
Any property tax, license ot permit means you don't own it(whatever) anyway.. You are renting it.. from the government..
I know you're right.
Because if the property has that "potential" value allowing the court to justify the taking, likewise, it should have that same value in 'just compensation' to the property owner. In other words, if the price being offered were truly fair, the owner would sell. Obviously it is not a fair price to convince the OWNER of the property to sell.
My voices are of the opinion that more than one of my teenagers needs to attend the rifleshooting weekend coming up next month here.
I wonder what those living in Hawaii would comment on your subject matter?
Unless he sends someone to kill him first, and one of his sons marrys the widow..
we are in agreement on that, there is specific eminent domain right (or there was before today). what I am saying is, don't couple that with saying it also means a single family homeowner has a right to build a 50 story building in place of it. they don't.
Bump to what you posted.
Our County Commissioners are considering having all Cats be licensed under the advisement made by the County Animal Control.
I have rarely ever heard a call to Animal Control for Cats on the loose and at large as I hear them almost daily regarding dogs on the scanner.
Another Ploy to bring in revenue no doubt.
I have been sadly coming to this conclusion over the last few years, and preparing to move. This seems to be the nail in the coffin.
In the middle of a blizzard!
Very sad indeed. This hateful, despicable decision may be the last nail in the coffin of what was once America. People can now have their homes snatched out from under them "for the public good"??? What the heck is the SCOTUS thinking???!!!
Don't expect any help from Bush, however. He has a problem in the form of a certain deal made for the purchase of land for a certain Texas stadium back in the early 1990's. If he does speak up about this, the MSM will rip him to shreds.
Only a constitutional amendment can save us now. Call your Congresscritters and Senators and DEMAND a Constitutional amendment to overturn the decision by these judicial TYRANTS. This decision must NOT be allowed to stand!
If private property is not sacrosanct, we have no freedom, no security, no prosperity.
No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
All rendered meaningless by a 5-4 decision?
I think not!
But considering that the lefties are as angry over this as we are (although as you said for different reasons), we may be able to use this to our advantage. Now we can tell them, "By blocking Bush's nominations to the Supreme Court, preferring instead justices like Stevens, Souter, Ginsberg and Breyer, you are guaranteed more rulings just like this one." The wall put up to Bush's nominations might then start to crack.
I know, scary, isn't it?
There's no Constitutional right to the land, or the house. Ownership is a privilege granted upon payment of fees, taxes and property maintenance according to extensive volumes of ridiculous, bureaucratic codes. It's rented communal property. Nuke reclamation sites and porn shops are additionally regulated and licenced.
Furthermore, there's no Constitutional right to pick your nose, or wipe your butt either. State health and safety codes can regulate that and under the Commerce Clause the feds can toss in their 2 cents too, since you'd be effecting interstate commerce in "med" services.
The Constitution doesn't grant rights. It's the blueprint for a govm't that should protect them.
"The Constitution doesn't grant rights. It's the blueprint for a govm't that should protect them"
Says something sad about our world that even the folks here, at FR, don't seem to know that.
great post, BoT.
Tree of Liberty bump.
With respect to your reply to post 218 in this thread: Then it is incumbent upon you to do something and encourage others that you know to do something! Let's get it done people while we still have the chance.
I also have less problem with that than with the taking of our land to give to a corporation.
I have an equally large problem with the idea that just because I own land I am presumed to be unable or unwilling to allow nature to coexist there. This merely states that some "expert" will do a better job of taking care of land that has been in the family's care for over 300 years.
Had that land not been cared for in the first place, there would be no endangered whatsywhoosit to protect.
Many freedoms were lost before this.
What exactly are we going to get done?
At least the Feds are not making it a hate crime for the property owner not to take their offer.
I noticed the MSM is reporting on the ruling. It appears even they (news media) are a little shocked by it. While they are reporting what happened, I noticed they wouldn't name the "justices" who voted FOR this outrage. They seem to be down playing the fact that they are all liberals, while the Conservatives dissented in the strongest possible terms.
For any democRAT voters lurking- let's make sure you understand what has happened: You work hard, save your money, buy a house. You put money into that house, and you want to leave that house to your children.
Guess what? That house that you worked so hard to get, is only yours until the govt. along side a big corporation, decides they want your property. They can take YOUR house away from you.
Oh, they have to offer money, but does that equal what you put into your house? Does it make up for the fact that you wanted to leave your home to your kids?(Some of the houses involved in the case had been in the owner's families since the early 1800's- several generations of family members were born in them). This really means that you don't own that propery at all.
THE UNELECTED SUPREME HIGH OVERLORDS OF THE USSA HAVE DISPENSED WITH YOUR PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS.
WAKE UP AMERICA! WAKE UP!
This is the most serious threat to the United States that has occured in my life time. I don't know what to do. I'm beyond outrage. Maybe we should send tea bags to the court and congress? This is on a par with the Boston Tea party, or it should be. What is the congress going to do about this? This is what leads to Civil War and states seceeding from the Union.
I was surprised at one conservative talk show host who, while acknowleging the seriousness of the issue, suggested that the solution was to " elect City Council members who won't take your property away". I was thinking What? This goes way beyond electing city council.
In fact, if this abomination is allowed to stand, there won't be a point to having elections or voting. The Judicial branch of government will officially establish itself as an unelected dictatorship. It's that serious.
I am fed up with republican's cowering over judicial nominations, and being to lazy to take thE democrats on. i.e. not making the rats filibuster for real, or using the constitutional ammendment, or whatever you have to.
Note to all Republican elected officials-
YOU WERE NOT SENT TO WASHINGTON TO "GET ALONG" WITH THE DEMACRATS.
YOU WERE SENT THERE TO STOP THEM. YOU WERE SENT THERE TO PREVENT THIER SOCIALIST AGENDA FROM BEING IMPLEMENTED.