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

Skip to comments.

U.S. top court backs Florida property owner in land-use case
Reuters ^ | Tue Jun 25, 2013 4:00pm EDT | Jonathan Stempel and Lawrence Hurley

Posted on 06/26/2013 7:42:45 AM PDT by Sopater

In a victory for advocates of private property rights, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that governments may owe compensation to property owners who are denied permits to develop their land.

Critics said the 5-4 decision, with the conservative justices comprising the majority, will make it more difficult and costly for governments to promote development or enact environmental changes designed to help the public generally.

The court sided with Coy Koontz, a Florida man who said limits imposed by the St. Johns River Water Management District on how he used his land were a "taking" subject to compensation under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

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


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: koontz; landuse; lawsuit; propertyrights; ruling; scotus; zoning
This is good news for property owners and bad news for busybody bureaucrats and elected officials who want to control things that are not theirs.
1 posted on 06/26/2013 7:42:45 AM PDT by Sopater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Sopater
In a victory for advocates of private property rights

You mean like the Founding Fathers? Like all Americans, whether they admit it or not?

It's like calling a medical breakthrough "a victory for advocates of health".

2 posted on 06/26/2013 7:48:21 AM PDT by schm0e ("we are in the midst of a coup.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

Now, if we could just get those thrown into prison for using their own land freed things might seem just a bit better.

Things will never be better in this nation abused by the ever looming bureaucracy that’s either filled with loonies or they are on a deliberate path to destroy America.

The buffoonish phony mystery man presently occupying the White Hut and his entire web of associates needs to be removed and as the Clinton duo were wont to say: “Sooner, rather than later.”

America has run out of time and patience as it’s not fun to watch while your nation is being bled dry by an enormous army of leeches.


3 posted on 06/26/2013 7:51:47 AM PDT by IbJensen (Liberals are like Slinkies, good for nothing, but you smile as you push them down the stairs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sopater
busybody bureaucrats and elected officials who want to control things that are not theirs

It isn't just government busybodies who try and tell you what to do with your property. There are any number of private individuals and organizations that want to use the power of government to control what YOU do for THEIR benefit.

4 posted on 06/26/2013 7:53:23 AM PDT by from occupied ga (Your government is your most dangerous enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sopater
The coal company I once worked for filed a lawsuit against the Department of the Interior back in the 80s making a similar claim. Our theory was that the Jimmah Cahtah surface mining law constituted a “taking” that left the property owner without compensation (the land owner's coal was made impossible to mine.)
Because of the cost involved in federal court, we chose not to appeal our defeat.
5 posted on 06/26/2013 7:56:32 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (NRA Life Member)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga
It isn't just government busybodies who try and tell you what to do with your property.

Well, I can't argue with that...
6 posted on 06/26/2013 7:56:48 AM PDT by Sopater (Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? - Matthew 20:15a)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: schm0e
You sound like you think property rights are a "good" think. Where have you been? Don't you know that is passe and quaint these days?

Congratulations, you've just made it on to yet another NSA list.

7 posted on 06/26/2013 8:08:42 AM PDT by Turbo Pig (...to close with and destroy the enemy...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sopater
UN Agenda 21 is deeply saddened.
8 posted on 06/26/2013 8:09:13 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Who could have guessed that one day pro wrestling would be less fake than network news?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks

Bummer. The statue of limitions has probably expired.


9 posted on 06/26/2013 8:14:09 AM PDT by dhs12345
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

What is with this USSC? Why are 4 so often opposed to our rights? What is their thinking or motivation? Rhetorical question: They’re heart-on-sleeve socialists.


10 posted on 06/26/2013 8:36:00 AM PDT by A Navy Vet (An Oath is Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A Navy Vet
Why are 4 so often opposed to our rights?

I cringe whenever I see a 5-4 decisions on cases involving fundamental rights. May there be a day that judges are duly impeached and removed for blatant activism. Like Gingrich said, a few scalps (proverbially speaking) should put these judges in check.

11 posted on 06/26/2013 9:14:05 AM PDT by VRW Conspirator (The Lefties can drink Kool-Aid; I will drink Tea.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: VRW Conspirator

The “takings” business is pretty fundamental. And it’s not a “penumbra”, it’s right there in black and white.

Sickening how the four liberals always, always, always vote in lockstep. They are not jurists, they are apparatchiks.


12 posted on 06/26/2013 1:34:12 PM PDT by denydenydeny (Admiration of absolute government is proportionate to the contempt one has for others.-Tocqueville)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: A Navy Vet
"What is with this USSC? Why are 4 so often opposed to our rights? What is their thinking or motivation?"

Simple, the liberal justices prefer to make their decisions according to an erroneous living Constitution, rather that what was written into law. Don't know how they come about to their conclusions, but it is mostly based on a "living" Constitution.

Don't really think they are evil, they just re-construct the Constitution through past rulings that have over time de-contructed the original intent, and give them new theories of what the Founding Fathers may have meant. It's there complex legaleese interpretation, where us conservatives see the US Constitution as absolute.

You and I can argue the original of a beer. I can say that Samuel Adams has a certain formula and that should remain supreme within its company. You can argue that no one has a such a formula that can't be broken by patent/copywrite laws. I's all a matter of interpretation. Unfortunately, the writers of the Constitution could not foresee every possible future conflict with their document.

When they wrote the highly abused General Welfare clause, and the lessor abused Commerce Clause, they couldn't envision modern politicians using such simple statements to guide us into tyranny. They did their best, but couldn't foresee the greed and power of future politicians, although they did argue it from time to time.

13 posted on 07/01/2013 2:29:29 AM PDT by A Navy Vet (An Oath is Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | 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