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

Skip to comments.

Property-rights dispute
The Washington Times ^ | July 17, 2007 | Sonya D. Jones and John R. Lott Jr.

Posted on 07/17/2007 5:48:39 AM PDT by 3AngelaD

Retirees Shirley and Herbert Leu had a problem. Part of their backyard was collapsing into a ditch that ran along the U.S.-Canadian border. Before building their 4-foot-high retaining wall, the Leus made sure they were in compliance with all local regulations...It never dawned on the Leus that this would lead to an international incident and an ideological battle over private property. The debate became one of whether an international commission could simply come onto their property, remove their wall and then send them the bill.

The controversy escalated to soap opera proportions with the Departments of State and Justice as well as the White House opposing the International Boundary Commission's (IBC) edict and President Bush last week stepping in and firing the U.S. representative on the commission. Apparently, this is the first time that a president has ever fired such a commissioner.

For his part, the fired commissioner, Dennis Schornack, claims that once appointed he has the job for life and cannot be fired. He is vowing to fight his firing in court. The IBC claims authority to enter and take the Leus' private property under a treaty between the United States and Canada...

To put it mildly, the Leus were shocked. After all, their retaining wall stands about 8 feet from the actual border andwell within their property line."[Mr. Schornack] was so rude, and so abrupt, standing and telling me he had the power to take the wall down and that if I got a lawyer, he'd win..."

To Mr. Schornack, the dispute is largely one of too much fealty to property rights.... Mr. Schornack and the IBC actually responded that they are not a government agency and are therefore not subject to the laws of the United States and its Constitution....

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism
KEYWORDS: johnlott; propertyrights; sonyajones; takingsclause
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-52 next last
This is frightening. At least the administration came down on the side of the property owners. Bush was right to fire the guy.
1 posted on 07/17/2007 5:48:39 AM PDT by 3AngelaD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
they are not a government agency and are therefore not subject to the laws of the United States and its Constitution

Cool! I'm not a government agency either! The law can't touch me!

2 posted on 07/17/2007 5:55:13 AM PDT by agere_contra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD

If you give Leus an exception, then you have to give everyone else an exception.


3 posted on 07/17/2007 5:56:54 AM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
The simple fact that this egomaniacal “organization” can claim “position for life” and “not subject to the laws of the US constitution” is grounds to have the SOB(s) taken out and shot.
4 posted on 07/17/2007 5:57:12 AM PDT by xcamel ("It's Talk Thompson Time!" >> irc://irc.freenode.net/fredthompson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
Bush was right to fire the guy.

Shhhh... you don't want the Democrat Party to hear that! They might suggest the firing was illegal :)

5 posted on 07/17/2007 5:57:21 AM PDT by pnh102
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
If you give Leus an exception, then you have to give everyone else an exception

An exception to what?

6 posted on 07/17/2007 5:58:35 AM PDT by VeniVidiVici (Conservatives are educated. Liberals are indoctrinated.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD

Walter Peck found a new job!

7 posted on 07/17/2007 6:00:25 AM PDT by frithguild (The Freepers moved as a group, like a school of sharks sweeping toward an unaware and unarmed victim)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

Bingo. I’m not a lawyer but I learned that the word “precedent” is very important, even in the by-laws and covenants of HOAs.


8 posted on 07/17/2007 6:03:11 AM PDT by leadpenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD

Okay. Bush’s firing of Schornack has restored me to his alliance—but only tepidly; I’m still waiting for the pardon of the Border Patrol Agents.


9 posted on 07/17/2007 6:04:13 AM PDT by Savage Beast ("History is not just cruel. It is witty." ~Charles Krauthammer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

An exception to their private property rights? Without notice? For a harmless wall? Hello? In fact, I think we should be encouraging people who live along the border to build walls, not punish them. But here is a “multi-national” commission that does not recognize the rights provided in our Constitution, run by an egomaniac. I’d say this is a pretty good place to take a stand, and so did the president.


10 posted on 07/17/2007 6:04:21 AM PDT by 3AngelaD (They screwed up their own countries so bad they had to leave, and now they're here screwing up ours)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
"Schornack's hardheaded approach unfortunately justifies people's worst fears about government."

YOU BET!

And what's really stranger than fiction is that millions of Americans are working overtime to INCREASE the power, reach, and appetite of burocrats and of the Frankenstein's monster known as the Federal Government!

11 posted on 07/17/2007 6:09:52 AM PDT by Savage Beast ("History is not just cruel. It is witty." ~Charles Krauthammer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD

“Ideologue”? I *like* ideologues! Here’s what the fired man said:

“To Mr. Schornack, the dispute is largely one of too much fealty to property rights. “I’m not an ideologue, and it seemed to me that I was being demanded to adopt the ideology of the Justice Department.” He claims that the Justice Department lawyers “are on basically amission to pare back what they see as government intrusion intoprivate property.” The problem? That treaty the IBC relies upon for its authority does not actually authorize the regulation of that 20-foot-wide zone. Even so, Mr. Schornack and the IBC set a deadline for the Leus to remove their retaining wall, otherwise the IBC would do it themselves.”


12 posted on 07/17/2007 6:12:30 AM PDT by hocndoc (http://ccgoporg.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
Despite the fact that the IBC claims to be authorized to regulate and control the use of private property within the United States, Mr. Schornack and the IBC actually responded that they are not a government agency and are therefore not subject to the laws of the United States and its Constitution. The Justice Department asked to take over the case and negotiate a compromise that considers the couple's private property complaints. But the commission claimed that, as an international commission, it was not obligated to compromise on the issues.

Mr. Schornack needs a good flogging, followed by being run out of town on a rail. And the Dems still want the UN to run the world.

13 posted on 07/17/2007 6:13:14 AM PDT by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
If you give Leus an exception, then you have to give everyone else an exception.

An exception to what? I've read this article a few times, and I really don't understand the claims of this "commission." The fact is that the wall was built well within the boundaries of their property. Is the commission stating that their authority over property is, in effect, an easement well onto their own property?

What really pisses me off is the attitude of the US representative, in saying a) that he's got the job for life and can't be fired, and b) that they're not a government commission, and therefore not subject to laws or the Constitution.

IMHO, if an international entity is operating on US soil, it's subject to the laws of the US. Since these people are NOT diplomats, no diplomatic immunity is assumed.

Mark

14 posted on 07/17/2007 6:14:18 AM PDT by MarkL (Listen, Strange women lyin' in ponds distributin' swords is no basis for a system of government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

Why did you omit the tar and feathers? Seems to me Schornack is a prime candidate for that part of the treatment.


15 posted on 07/17/2007 6:19:36 AM PDT by 3AngelaD (They screwed up their own countries so bad they had to leave, and now they're here screwing up ours)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: frithguild

Maybe he didn’t say the ‘magic word’.


16 posted on 07/17/2007 6:21:35 AM PDT by waverna
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Savage Beast; xcamel
Okay. Bush’s firing of Schornack has restored me to his alliance—but only tepidly; I’m still waiting for the pardon of the Border Patrol Agents.


Bush did good on this. Should have made more press out of it.

Now if he would pardon Ramos, Compean, and Gilmer Hernandez, and fire all those incompetents that allowed the situation to deteriorate to this point, he could do good.

If President Bush would realize there is a conservative base that would support him when he moves right (pard the pun) he has all kinds of opportunity to "create a legacy". Needs to quit loving illegals, and do the country right on the border, and he would be hailed a leader, rather than where he is standing now in regard to everything having a shadow, because he is ignoring "his base".
17 posted on 07/17/2007 6:22:34 AM PDT by Issaquahking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Savage Beast

“Okay. Bush’s firing of Schornack has restored me to his alliance—but only tepidly; I’m still waiting for the pardon of the Border Patrol Agents.”

No worries, Dianne Feinstein’s working on that one.


18 posted on 07/17/2007 6:24:09 AM PDT by JZelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
...simply come onto their property, remove their wall and then send them the bill. be removed by the local coroner.

There, fixed it.

19 posted on 07/17/2007 6:24:19 AM PDT by NY.SS-Bar9 (DR #1692)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Issaquahking

Dennis Schornack needs a year in jail, in general poulation, always knowing that one year after entering the jail, he will die by firing squad. Bet the guy is a democrat, doing BS that conservatives refuse to do...


20 posted on 07/17/2007 6:26:18 AM PDT by Issaquahking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-52 next last

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