AMERICA IS OUTRAGED.
WHERE IS PRESIDENT BUSH?
NOT A WORD.
Posted on 06/24/2005 11:13:50 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
Your home or business can be taken by force by local officials for virtually any reason, thanks to a long-awaited but misguided decision by a split Supreme Court on Thursday.
The 5-4 vote in Kelo v. the City of New London (Conn.) was not the type of decision that garnered widespread public attention, given that it dealt with a seemingly arcane piece of law. The question raised by the court was whether governments can use eminent domain to take land by force in order to promote economic development.
But the case is not arcane, and the ruling will literally change what it means to own property in this country. In Kelo, the justices obliterated the commonly held view of the Constitution's Fifth Amendment. Many Americans who don't even know what eminent domain means will certainly feel its sting, as governments have been given a carte blanche to take property, thus transferring even more land-use decisions from property owners to the government.
The Fifth Amendment states that individuals cannot "be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation."
The key issue in the Kelo case was the question of public use. Traditionally, governments have been able to use eminent domain to build genuinely public projects such as roads, bridges, schools, prisons and courthouses. That was what the founders had in mind when they drafted the amendment.
In 1954, however, the Supreme Court decided in Berman v. Parker that eminent domain could also be used for blight removal. The case revolved around efforts by the District of Columbia to use eminent domain to clear away a slum area. Since then, localities have become aggressively creative in their definition of blight.
(Excerpt) Read more at ocregister.com ...
Is Clarence Thomas a constitutional conservative? How about Justice Scalia?
The issue is property rights protection. The 14th Amend was put in place to protect any citizen's fed recognized rights from any govm't entity. The justfication explicitly given in the 5th for the takings is(was) public use. As Thomas noted, there is now no meaning to the explicit justification given in the 5th.
Rights protection is not meddling.
We want the fed gov as the second from last guarantor of individual rights enumerated in the Constitution whether those rights are abrogated by other individuals, cities, states or countries.
Well, CBS News' 60 Minutes is against it this ruling!
Eminent Domain: Being Abused?
www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/09/26/60minutes/main575343.shtml
Didn't violate the 5th like that?
Pull my other leg. The one with bells on it.
I propose a mass campaign likening this to Zimbabwe's recent "urban renewal" plan which bulldozes the homes of the poor to make room for "new-style entrepeneurs."
You would favor the elimination of the states?
gold. 1933.
That's an amazing line from ol' Sandy Baby.
Eminent domain is only abuse by the federal government..
The States should be able to do whatever they want.. within that state.. The federal gov't has no business meddling in affairs within a state.. by ANY arm of the federal government.. expecially the Supremes.. The mergeing of the federal government with the governments of the states makes the U.S. a defacto democracy instead of the republic it was was designed as.. and this confusion is the root of ALL the present political problems..
Centralized government IS socialism or worse.. Local government is the cure.. When the borders between the states erode so do our freedoms.. Strong state borders strenghens a republic, weak state borders weaken a republic and make way for a democracy to appear.. The 2nd amendment was included to "FIX" the republic when it has degraded to a mere democracy(like NOW).. thats why it is a "right".. not a gov't granted privilege...
The States have an inherent "right" to enact public domain or NOT.. as to the whim of the people within that state.. its not any of the federal governments business..
Eminent domain has been used by the federal gov't in stealing state lands for "parks" and other purposes.. Alaska is almost ALL federal land.. Washington D.C. owning LAND in the states.. is politically obscene.. and a vector for corruption.. not to speak of its a Coup D'etat of State rights.. and political aggression on the people in a State..
The United States has Zero citizens.. All citizens in the U.S. are citizens of States.. when this fact is obscured.. The federal government runs amuck.. as it has been and is now..
No more than I'd favor the elimination of the people, or the feds. Rights protection is everyone's business.
It's not a bad thing if you are the one in power.
AMERICA IS OUTRAGED.
WHERE IS PRESIDENT BUSH?
NOT A WORD.
You must be reading the Orwellian Abridged Version of the Constitution that edited out the 14th Amendment.
Damn good question.
Property rights protection has fallen to the states and even to the counties. The Feds operate at a higher level, on the states, not on the people. Do we seriously want the Feds working directly on the people? There is a trend lately, especially in Civil Rights. Maybe that is what we want, and if so that is what we will get. However, it does not appear to be what FReepers want at all. Or do we pick and choose which issue to switch our home teams on?
I don't like the 14th... by the way an Orwellian republic is not far off.. maybe we can call the U.S. democracy.. Orwellia.. since America don't seem to like that old republic anymore.. and elect democrats and RINOs like they had good sense.. Reminds me of the old biblical proverb..
"The fool has said in his heart that Al Gore smart.."
(or something like that)..
Mr. Bush probably will not delve into this issue at all - hits too close to "home."
Mr Bush was one of the partners that owned the TX Rangers... the Ballpark (now Ameriquest) at Arlington was built on lands condemed/taken by Arlington for the new "temple" - I believe there are a few former home owners that are still trying to get restitution through the courts - its been over 10 years now. The Dallas Morning News can confirm.
The Dullus Cowgirlz owner (Jerry "Dingleberry" Jonez) is getting the same sweetheart deal from Arlington - there are folks whose homes will be wiped out by the new Cowgirlz stadium - too bad, it would have been most sweet to see the hokie pokies continue playing in God's toilette bowl (aka Texas Stadium).
Trajan88
I bought a gun. On the form it asked if I was a citizen of the United States. I checked yes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.