Posted on 06/23/2005 8:10:25 PM PDT by andie74
NEW LONDON, Conn. -- On Bill Von Winkle's side of town, word of the Supreme Court decision spread like the news of a passing relative. His cell phone rang incessantly.
"Hello," he answered. "Yeah, we lost. I know, hard to believe, huh?"
No sooner had he hung up the phone than his letter carrier walked by.
"Need a hug?" he asked.
Von Winkle is one of seven homeowners who learned Thursday that the city's plan to demolish their working class neighborhood in the name of economic development is constitutional.
On the other side of town, city leaders cheered the decision, calling it a victory for cash-strapped cities that want to spur redevelopment. The holdouts and their 15 homes were all that stood in the way of plans to build a hotel, office space and upscale homes.
"This case makes New London look good and you should be proud to live in New London," said the city's attorney, Wesley Horton, who argued the case before the high court.
Like New London, the high court was divided on the issue. Five justices sided with the city, saying economic revitalization qualifies as a public good and local officials know best when to use their eminent domain power for the community's benefit.
Four justices, led by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, said the decision opened the doors for wealthy to developers to drive poor residents out of their homes.
"The U.S. Supreme Court destroyed everybody's lives today, everybody who owns a home," said Richard Beyer, who owns two rental properties in the once vibrant immigrant neighborhood that has largely been reduced to swaths of rutted grass. "This was America."
(Excerpt) Read more at newsday.com ...
It would be a very popular Amendment.
Disagree about the left not supporting this kind of thing. Maybe those who vote left don't like this, but, note that all the justices who voted FOR the removal of private property rights are liberal, while those dissenting are conservative(though the article glosses over this fact.) Something democrat voters should think about i.e. this is NOT your daddy and grand-daddy's democrat party.
By the way, my aunt had to deal with a tax burden made by her "HINO". He deserted her when my cousin's were little. The govt. showed up on her door step 18 yrs later saying that HINO hadn't paid his taxes for some years and that they couldn't find him. (Never mind that she hadn't seen him in 18 years, had no idea where he was.) They tried to say that she owed the tax bill. She didn't have the money to pay it so they tried to take her house. ( She hadn't divorced HINO because she's Catholic).
She was finally, after many legal battles, able to get them to back off and keep her house-which was all she had in the world. (They eventually found HINO hiding out in Hawaii. ) Tragically, she also got breast cancer while going through this and died about a year after it was resolved.
Ask anyone in my family about it, and they'll tell you she got the cancer from having the stress of dealing with the govt. thugs trying to take her house. Just FYI.
Hope the Republican's are going to do something about this outrage.
Oh, by the way, those will be taxable top dollars, no?
It would be a very popular Amendment.
Disagree about the left not supporting this kind of thing. Maybe those who vote left don't like this, but, note that all the justices who voted FOR the removal of private property rights are liberal, while those dissenting are conservative(though the article glosses over this fact.) Something democrat voters should think about i.e. this is NOT your daddy and grand-daddy's democrat party.
By the way, my aunt had to deal with a tax burden made by her "HINO". He deserted her when my cousin's were little. The govt. showed up on her door step 18 yrs later saying that HINO hadn't paid his taxes for some years and that they couldn't find him. (Never mind that she hadn't seen him in 18 years, had no idea where he was.) They tried to say that she owed the tax bill. She didn't have the money to pay it so they tried to take her house. ( She hadn't divorced HINO because she's Catholic).
She was finally, after many legal battles, able to get them to back off and keep her house-which was all she had in the world. (They eventually found HINO hiding out in Hawaii. ) Tragically, she also got breast cancer while going through this and died about a year after it was resolved.
Ask anyone in my family about it, and they'll tell you she got the cancer from having the stress of dealing with the govt. thugs trying to take her house. Just FYI.
Hope the Republican's are going to do something about this outrage.
It would be a very popular Amendment.
Disagree about the left not supporting this kind of thing. Maybe those who vote left don't like this, but, note that all the justices who voted FOR the removal of private property rights are liberal, while those dissenting are conservative(though the article glosses over this fact.) Something democrat voters should think about i.e. this is NOT your daddy and grand-daddy's democrat party.
By the way, my aunt had to deal with a tax burden made by her "HINO". He deserted her when my cousin's were little. The govt. showed up on her door step 18 yrs later saying that HINO hadn't paid his taxes for some years and that they couldn't find him. (Never mind that she hadn't seen him in 18 years, had no idea where he was.) They tried to say that she owed the tax bill. She didn't have the money to pay it so they tried to take her house. ( She hadn't divorced HINO because she's Catholic).
She was finally, after many legal battles, able to get them to back off and keep her house-which was all she had in the world. (They eventually found HINO hiding out in Hawaii. ) Tragically, she also got breast cancer while going through this and died about a year after it was resolved.
Ask anyone in my family about it, and they'll tell you she got the cancer from having the stress of dealing with the govt. thugs trying to take her house. Just FYI.
Hope the Republican's are going to do something about this outrage.
It would be a very popular Amendment.
Disagree about the left not supporting this kind of thing. Maybe those who vote left don't like this, but, note that all the justices who voted FOR the removal of private property rights are liberal, while those dissenting are conservative(though the article glosses over this fact.) Something democrat voters should think about i.e. this is NOT your daddy and grand-daddy's democrat party.
By the way, my aunt had to deal with a tax burden made by her "HINO". He deserted her when my cousin's were little. The govt. showed up on her door step 18 yrs later saying that HINO hadn't paid his taxes for some years and that they couldn't find him. (Never mind that she hadn't seen him in 18 years, had no idea where he was.) They tried to say that she owed the tax bill. She didn't have the money to pay it so they tried to take her house. ( She hadn't divorced HINO because she's Catholic).
She was finally, after many legal battles, able to get them to back off and keep her house-which was all she had in the world. (They eventually found HINO hiding out in Hawaii. ) Tragically, she also got breast cancer while going through this and died about a year after it was resolved.
Ask anyone in my family about it, and they'll tell you she got the cancer from having the stress of dealing with the govt. thugs trying to take her house. Just FYI.
Hope the Republican's are going to do something about this outrage.
It would be a very popular Amendment.
Disagree about the left not supporting this kind of thing. Maybe those who vote left don't like this, but, note that all the justices who voted FOR the removal of private property rights are liberal, while those dissenting are conservative(though the article glosses over this fact.) Something democrat voters should think about i.e. this is NOT your daddy and grand-daddy's democrat party.
By the way, my aunt had to deal with a tax burden made by her "HINO". He deserted her when my cousin's were little. The govt. showed up on her door step 18 yrs later saying that HINO hadn't paid his taxes for some years and that they couldn't find him. (Never mind that she hadn't seen him in 18 years, had no idea where he was.) They tried to say that she owed the tax bill. She didn't have the money to pay it so they tried to take her house. ( She hadn't divorced HINO because she's Catholic).
She was finally, after many legal battles, able to get them to back off and keep her house-which was all she had in the world. (They eventually found HINO hiding out in Hawaii. ) Tragically, she also got breast cancer while going through this and died about a year after it was resolved.
Ask anyone in my family about it, and they'll tell you she got the cancer from having the stress of dealing with the govt. thugs trying to take her house. Just FYI.
Hope the Republican's are going to do something about this outrage.
It would be a very popular Amendment.
Disagree about the left not supporting this kind of thing. Maybe those who vote left don't like this, but, note that all the justices who voted FOR the removal of private property rights are liberal, while those dissenting are conservative(though the article glosses over this fact.) Something democrat voters should think about i.e. this is NOT your daddy and grand-daddy's democrat party.
By the way, my aunt had to deal with a tax burden made by her "HINO". He deserted her when my cousin's were little. The govt. showed up on her door step 18 yrs later saying that HINO hadn't paid his taxes for some years and that they couldn't find him. (Never mind that she hadn't seen him in 18 years, had no idea where he was.) They tried to say that she owed the tax bill. She didn't have the money to pay it so they tried to take her house. ( She hadn't divorced HINO because she's Catholic).
She was finally, after many legal battles, able to get them to back off and keep her house-which was all she had in the world. (They eventually found HINO hiding out in Hawaii. ) Tragically, she also got breast cancer while going through this and died about a year after it was resolved.
Ask anyone in my family about it, and they'll tell you she got the cancer from having the stress of dealing with the govt. thugs trying to take her house. Just FYI.
Hope the Republican's are going to do something about this outrage.
It's always nice to meet someone else who is good at it.
The Supreme Farts have been perverting the Constitution for YEARS with the 'elastic' commerce clause and the 'living' Constitution!
Most Americans (including quite a few FReepers) don't even know how to READ the Constitution, much less understand what it MEANS!
It's been downright SCARY over the last few years with some of the posts here on FR - folks cheering unconstitutional acts of government while considering themselves 'Patriots'!
You DON'T get to pick and choose, cause the Constitution AIN'T Burger King! You have to either use the entire document with the INTENT for which it was written, change it ONLY within the constitutional mechanism, or the whole thing is TRASH!
I can only pray that the majority of Americans WAKE UP long enough to at least STALL our slide into communism!
(high-octane rant /off)
Wasn't this a case where there was a somewhat fast and loose definition of what was a blighted property? A blighted property being that there wasn't an attached two car garage, not at least three bedrooms, not having central air conditioning. So such houses are thus on the same level as a run down crack house? BRAVO SIERRA! The municipal governments must be getting ideas from the homeowner "associations" and taking it to the ultimate limit. This is facism plain and simple!
Do you live in Nashville or it's suburbs? We went there last summer and i was astounded at the number of churches. Cab driver told us there was even a church specifically for gay people.
I agree, similar to oil royalties. Since their land is "revenue producing", they and their heirs should receive payments.
How is New London determining the 'value' of these homes? I hope they're including the new value of the land on which the homes are sitting when they make that determination, if these folks are going to have to re-create these homes somewhere else in New London.
Apparently they're valuable enough to shred the Constitution over, valuable enough for the government to violate the rights of citizens, and valuable enough that they will make or break the entire community. Pay up, New London: You've set a pretty high price on these homes and their rightful owners should be compensated.
Excellent point. It seems to me that the biggest waste of property is often government building in choice locations. How about we renovate some of these non revenue producing building and open up casinos and Wal-Marts.
...said city official Boss Hogg as he lit a cigar with a $100 bill provided in a stack by a local developer.
Of course. How dare someone receive more than their fare share. Jobless Jenny has 5 kids to feed with that money.
To: U. S. Congress
PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVENCES
We the People of the United States, do hereby demand that our duly elected representatives in both houses of Congress, initiate impeachment proceedings against the following Supreme Court Justices:
John Paul Stevens
Anthony Kennedy
David H. Souter
Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Stephen G. Breyer
We, the undersigned, consider the Supreme Court ruling in Kelo v. New London, 04-108, rendered June 23, 2005, not only unacceptable, but to be in criminal violation of the Justice's oaths to uphold, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
Be advised that We the People regard elected officials to be our public servants. Failure to take action against the Justices specified shall be considered support for the decision rendered in the aforementioned case, and will result in our resolve to ensure your defeat in the next election.
Being from myriad political and ideological spectra, we are united in our belief that our right to own property is inalienable.Sincerely,
PLEASE sign the petition - we need to let Congress know of our outrage.
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.