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

Skip to comments.

Eminent Domain Amendment
kerrythomas.com ^ | December 6, 2005 | Kerry Thomas

Posted on 12/06/2005 1:01:46 AM PST by mukraker

As you know, on June 23, 2005, the United States Supreme Court made a startling ruling in the case of Kelo v. New London (docket #04-108). In that case, the Supreme Court interpreted the eminent domain clause of the 5th Amendment of the United States Constitution in such a way that now anyone’s private property can be taken by a government body and given to a private developer, in an effort to increase the government’s tax base.

The 5th Amendment reads in part “...nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensa.” The Court ruled 5-4 that the “public use” requirement of the 5th Amendment would be met as long as the increased tax base from the new development would result in greater tax revenue to the local government.

Because this ruling puts ALL private property in the United States in jeopardy of being seized, it is now necessary to amend our United States Constitution, in an attempt to limit this broad new power that has been granted local governments. To that end, the following is proposed:

Eminent Domain Amendment To The United States Constitution

“No Private Property acquired for Public Use shall be sold, given, leased, rented or otherwise conveyed to any non-Public entity without written permission of the private property owner from whom the property was acquired for public use. If said former private property owner is deceased, the written permission of all current heirs must be acquired.”

If you ever hope to be secure in your private property rights, an amendment like this one is needed – now.

But such a move to amend the Constitution must begin at the grass roots level. No career politician will support such an amendment without broad popular support.

This will be a long process. But the sooner we begin, the sooner our private property rights will be restored.

Our court system has proven it cannot be relied upon to ensure that our private property rights are protected. It will take a Constitutional amendment to force the courts to uphold what once was thought to be a guaranteed right to private property ownership in America.


TOPICS: Editorial
KEYWORDS: amendment; eminentdomain; kellovnewlondon; kelo; supremecourt
From New London CT to Riveria Beach FL to Oakland CA and everywhere in between our once-secure private property rights have been stripped by the Supreme Court. It's time We, the People, reclaim our rights.
1 posted on 12/06/2005 1:01:46 AM PST by mukraker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mukraker

Most people seem to have this misconception that when they purchase a home or any given piece of property, that after the purchase price has been met; they automatically own that said piece of property or parcel of land. When in actuality all they have is a paid lease from the government to occupy. Don't believe me ?, try not paying property taxes more than 2 years and watch what happens.


2 posted on 12/06/2005 1:17:37 AM PST by CheezyChesster (The government retains all rights to properties located within it's borders. Sad but True)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mukraker

i'm behind you 110%. but i think war would be quicker, but thats probably just me.


3 posted on 12/06/2005 1:17:41 AM PST by howlingmule
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mukraker; All
To me, these are the defining issues of our times:

-Men(ace) in Black? SCOTUS goes Rogue...--

-Useless Eaters vs The Death Cult--

-Thunder on the Border-- (Minuteman Project)--

1- an unaccountable Judiciary.
2- whose life is it, anyway? Yours, or someone else's?
3- whose Country is it?

There are other vital issues, of course- but these three will determine just who we really are as a nation.

4 posted on 12/06/2005 1:23:25 AM PST by backhoe (Just Another 'Bot for Terri... for Life...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: howlingmule

I'm with you. The Declaration of Independence spells out our rights and duties.


5 posted on 12/06/2005 1:31:10 AM PST by wolfpat (Your, you're, yore: Learn the difference.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: CheezyChesster
It IS possible to stop paying property taxes and still keep your property. You simply have to pay the entire bonding obligations on your property, then obtain the Title from the local title company. Once you have obtained your title, you take that title to the local tax administration office, with proof that all outstanding obligations have been paid in full, and submit a written notice to remove your property from the tax rolls.

OR you can form a tax-exempt organization (charity, church, educational institution, etc), go through all that paperwork to obtain an official recognition of exempt status from the IRS, then transfer the property to that tax-exempt organization.

But it's usually just easier to pay the taxes....

6 posted on 12/06/2005 1:34:48 AM PST by mukraker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: KDD

ping


7 posted on 12/06/2005 1:37:21 AM PST by md2576 (Don't be such a Shehan Hugger!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mukraker

First off, that will never be added to the Constitution/Bill of Rights.... Second, thats kind of odd. How about 'No land shall be acquired by eminant domain for non-public use'.


8 posted on 12/06/2005 1:48:43 AM PST by GeronL (Leftism is the INSANE Cult of the Artificial)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mukraker

Another misconception people have is that they think it is alright to build any size or shape of construction on their property without permits. Another bad idea is to accumulate hordes of junk, vehicles, rubbish and unkept yards. Other examples of misconcieved rights of property ownership include the right to host all night parties, playing loud music, owning more than 2 dogs without a permit, drilling for your own Oil & Natural Gas ! - LOL - (had to throw that in there), digging too china in your own Mine, digging your own pond, burying wetlands located on properties, building your house underground and the list goes on..........The amount of Rights any one person or persons have in any given piece of property is directly proportional to the size of the general population. More people, less Rights.


9 posted on 12/06/2005 1:53:52 AM PST by CheezyChesster (The government retains all rights to properties located within it's borders. Sad but True)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

That's what we have now, and it didn't stop New London from seizing the Kelo property. The problem is in the word "public use." A local government acquires private property for what they say is a public use, but then, once they own the property, they can sell it to a private developer. In real estate it's known as a flip.


10 posted on 12/06/2005 1:59:29 AM PST by mukraker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: mukraker
Okay, how about 'Public entities are banned from buying and selling private property' PERIOD. How about we ban all government agencies from even owning land not used for the benefit of the public??

It'd get my vote.

11 posted on 12/06/2005 2:05:07 AM PST by GeronL (Leftism is the INSANE Cult of the Artificial)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: CheezyChesster

Thats why Ted Turner bought up Montana, he wants to secede and form the one-man nation! Buffalonia!!


12 posted on 12/06/2005 2:06:18 AM PST by GeronL (Leftism is the INSANE Cult of the Artificial)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Of course it's always good to be sitting well with the government. What part of my tag line are you having trouble with / is it the (sad) or the (true) part ?


13 posted on 12/06/2005 2:12:27 AM PST by CheezyChesster (The government retains all rights to properties located within it's borders. Sad but True)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: CheezyChesster
the true part obviously, cause I pretty well KNOW its SAD!!
14 posted on 12/06/2005 2:14:20 AM PST by GeronL (Leftism is the INSANE Cult of the Artificial)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: CheezyChesster
I have recently formed yet another idea for the perfect government... OKAY.. you might not remember this post of brilliance, but my new one is a sure-fire winner.

Its that we all are our own governments!!! I think it would work extraordinarily well myself.

15 posted on 12/06/2005 2:17:05 AM PST by GeronL (Leftism is the INSANE Cult of the Artificial)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

That was a great piece of work I must say. But you neglected to account how the segregated liberals were going to pay for all their programs without conservatives doing the work. Ya see, thats the beauty of the form of government we have now. What we have now is conservatives doing the work to pay the taxes the liberals need to impose on us. If we didn't have liberals imposing the taxes, who would ?. It's a nasty job but somebody has to do it !


16 posted on 12/06/2005 2:36:21 AM PST by CheezyChesster (The government retains all rights to properties located within it's borders. Sad but True)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: mukraker
How about the fact that the constitution is just fine the way it is. The problem is that a majority of the Supreme Court is twisting the meaning into something that it's not...pi**ing down our backs and telling us that it's raining.

The real question is what do we do about such arrogance on their part and the part of the other black-robed dictators.
17 posted on 12/06/2005 2:46:23 AM PST by johncatl (...governs least, governs best.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mukraker

Why pass another constitutional amendment that the black-robed thieves will ignore?

We can take several steps to fix this out-of-control court -

1) to honor the foresight of the founders, impeach and hang the five Marxist thieves who gave us Kelo

2) don't give taxpayer money to states that use Kelo

3) appoint judges who can read and understand plain English

4) ignore rulings that are offensive to constitutional individual rights


18 posted on 12/06/2005 5:46:26 AM PST by sergeantdave (Member of the Arbor Day Foundation, travelling the country and destroying open space)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

I've always wondered about why the Constitution didn't give any mechanism for secessions....


19 posted on 12/06/2005 10:15:24 AM PST by mukraker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: CheezyChesster
But you neglected to account how the segregated liberals were going to pay for all their programs without conservatives doing the work

That was my point, they are imperialists

20 posted on 12/06/2005 9:24:27 PM PST by GeronL (Leftism is the INSANE Cult of the Artificial)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: mukraker

I suppose they thought that was just something that was obvious


21 posted on 12/06/2005 9:26:06 PM PST by GeronL (Leftism is the INSANE Cult of the Artificial)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: mukraker
Would the proposed amendment address only federal exercises of Eminent Domain, or would it include the States?
22 posted on 12/06/2005 9:33:33 PM PST by TeleStraightShooter (When Frist exercises his belated Constitutional "Byrd option", Reid will have a "Nuclear Reaction".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: howlingmule

Aw, you just wanna shoot stuff.

Not that there's anything wrong with that. =)


23 posted on 12/06/2005 9:35:59 PM PST by Constantine XIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: mukraker

bookmark


24 posted on 12/06/2005 9:39:41 PM PST by herewego (Piss off a liberal- Be Happy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mukraker
The problem is in the word "public use." A local government acquires private property for what they say is a public use, but then, once they own the property, they can sell it to a private developer.

The defect is that "public use" has morphed into "public benefit". Public benefit has been interpreted to mean improved tax revenues. Public use originally meant right of way for roads or other common use properties owned by the government. It has been perverted.

25 posted on 12/06/2005 9:46:27 PM PST by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: mukraker
Why do we need an Eminent Domain amendment to the Constitution? Why do we need each state to pass an Eminent Domain prohibition law? Why do we need Congress to pass an Eminent Domain prohibition law?

Can't we take another eminent domain case, say the new Florida case, and fast-track it to the Supreme Court to let them have a do-over? I'm hoping that the Supreme Court didn't anticipate this rush to abuse eminent domain after their Kelo ruling. The Florida case is massive in its scope of displaced people. I know "old Florida." These homes aren't blights, they are the original home designs from the era that housed the people that made Florida the popular place that it is today. I especially like the comment from the person on Hannity and Colmes last night who said "The view is too good for the people who live there." They have the misfortune of owning the houses on the intra-coastal, but they don't own the yachts that others would like to berth there.

Can't the Supreme Court take another eminent domain case and reverse themselves and settle the matter that way, withouth forcing a new hodge-podge of legislation?

26 posted on 12/08/2005 5:15:42 PM PST by Political Junkie Too (It's still not safe to vote Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mukraker

From New London CT to Riveria Beach FL to Oakland CA and everywhere in between our once-secure private property rights have been stripped by the Supreme Court. It's time We, the People, reclaim our rights.""

Heard Sean Hannity today trying to question the "maoyr"?? of Riveria Beach Fla about taking hundreds of properties to build new ones that would produce more revenue.

The guy talked in circles, over and over again. Sean had a hard time pinning him down to anything. All he could say was "we need the money". How this puke got elected is beyond me. Makes more sense than ever to know WHO you are electing to ANY post in your government.


27 posted on 12/08/2005 5:25:23 PM PST by ridesthemiles (ridesthemiles)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

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