Posted on 07/14/2005 9:51:41 AM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection
President Clinton yesterday added his voice to a growing chorus of Americans of various political persuasions who disagree with a recent Supreme Court ruling that upheld the government's use of eminent domain powers to take private property from one owner and give it to another.
Speaking to a conference of liberal college students, ...Clinton stated his disagreement with the court's decision last month, by a 5-4 vote, to allow a Connecticut city to carry out a redevelopment project by seizing 15 properties over the owners' objections.
...Clinton's views on the issue did not appear ironclad. After offering his assessment, he added, "I might be wrong." He also flubbed the name of the city involved, which was New London, not Norwalk.
In his speech, ...Clinton also criticized press coverage of statements his wife, Senator Clinton, has made recently in which she appeared to stray from a doctrinaire line advanced by abortion rights advocates...
"I wouldn't make that old lady in Norwalk sell her house," the former president said. "She was all 70 years or 80 years old. I thought it was wrong."
The former president used the example to illustrate his belief that few Americans are strictly orthodox in their political views. He said it was the first time he could remember agreeing with a dissent filed by two of the court's most conservative members, Justices Scalia and Thomas.
"I never thought it would happen," said ...Clinton, who once taught constitutional law... in Arkansas.
Property-rights activists, who have deplored the ruling, said they were delighted and not entirely surprised to have ...Clinton speak out against the decision.
"That underscores what we've seen since the opinion was announced, this outrage from liberals and conservatives, Republicans and Democrats alike..." said Chip Miller, a spokesman for a conservative legal group, the Institute for Justice.
(Excerpt) Read more at nysun.com ...
Heh Heh! Gotta love the guy don't you? NO!
On the other hand, angry phone calls to the gang of 7 was useful, to make sure they don't support a demon-rat filibuster when Bush picks a nominee. I think even McCain got the message(maybe?)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1438134/posts
But what about Jimma ... what does Jimma think about it?
How did your two appointees, Ginsberg and Breyer, rule, Bill? As usual, they were against private property rights.
Consistent or not, it's pretty sad when a GOP politician won't even support a position that is both right AND overwhelmingly popular.
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.