Comments on: Supreme Court Rules Cities May Seize Homes for Private Use

By: barbara roberts

barbara roberts — Fri, 01 Jul 2005 19:25:08 +0000

Isn't this why we celebrate the fourth of July. To prevent exactly this sort of high handedness?Now will I have to learn the nazi salute as well?

By: elgodosimp

elgodosimp — Sun, 26 Jun 2005 14:38:27 +0000

This is an issue that should unite all principled liberals and conservatives, as well as any American who believes in the Constitution. The task at hand is to mobilize pressure on state and local governments to restrict their use of eminent domain. Every homeowner in the country should write their elected officials today to demand that economic development and tax farming be excluded from the definition of public use. Every candidate for local office should be forced to foreswear ever taking someone's home to give to a developer.

By: small dead animals

small dead animals — Sun, 26 Jun 2005 04:14:32 +0000

Reversing Kelo Spotted at NRO's The Corner; "The quickest way to reverse Kelo is to find some conservative town in Utah somewhere to shut down an abortion clinic in order to make room for a Wal-Mart."...

By: Danny Carlton (aka Jack Lewis)

Danny Carlton (aka Jack Lewis) — Fri, 24 Jun 2005 14:27:36 +0000

SCOTUS destroys concept of private property

From the Washington Times: The Supreme Court yesterday said cities can seize people's homes or businesses to make way for...

By: aTypical Joe: A gay New Yorker living in the rural south.

aTypical Joe: A gay New Yorker living in the rural south. — Fri, 24 Jun 2005 04:01:13 +0000

Eminent domain

My gut reaction to the decision was negative: a government can take from one private owner to give to another (replace a thriving Motel 6 with a Ritz Carlton, a home by a shopping mall) if it thinks the action...

By: Jim Peterson

Jim Peterson — Fri, 24 Jun 2005 01:34:06 +0000

THIS IS OUTRAGES----THEY DO NOT HAVE THIS RIGHT. " ARTICLE 5, OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION." PROHIBITS THIS ACTIVITY.
I FIRMLY BELIEVE THERE SHOULD BE 1O-15 YEAR TERM LIMITS ON ALL SUPREME COURT JUSTICES.

By: Unforgetting » Blog Archive » Unless you can pay more in taxes and create more jobs than a new Walmart…

Fri, 24 Jun 2005 01:02:38 +0000

[...] of a Connecticut community to raze private homes in order to allow a private developer to build an office, residential, and retail complex. The Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution f [...]

By: The LLama Butchers

The LLama Butchers — Thu, 23 Jun 2005 21:44:46 +0000

Just Because I'm A RINO Doesn't Mean I Can't Get Cranky Flag burning amendment? Save your breath. Over the top anti-Hillary screeds? Meh. But SCOTUS gutting the Fifth Amendment Takings Clause? Bad! Bad! Bad! I'm jumping right in on this one with Michelle and Prof. Bainbridge. This is the equivalent of...

By: The Galvin Opinion

The Galvin Opinion — Thu, 23 Jun 2005 19:45:59 +0000

Media Bias? Scalia's pic on eminent domain article These pictures of Justice Scalia accompanied the headline, "Supreme Court Rules Cities May Seize Homes" in 3 separate areas of Yahoo News "Most Popular" section even though Scalia sided with the dissenting minority

By: Blogs of War

Blogs of War — Thu, 23 Jun 2005 19:39:50 +0000

Supreme Court Eviscerates the Notion of Private Property Rights in America

Have a home on nice corner lot? Better hope that a fast food chain doesn't take an interest in it. Live near an airport? Holiday Inn would love to build a high-rise hotel where your home now stands. Corrupt, cheaply bought, local officials hold your f...

By: ALS

ALS — Thu, 23 Jun 2005 19:29:46 +0000

Someone please tell me: How on God's green earth is this Constitutional? It's bad enough when people are forced to sell their homes to make way for "roads" for new housing developments, but this is absolutely outrageous. This is taking eminent domain entirely too far. Up until this point, I've been reluctant to jump on the "Supreme Court is out of control" band wagon, but here I go... The Supreme Court is completely out of control. All Americans should be outraged at this erosion of our property rights. The chipping away at the Constitution continues...

By: Arguing with signposts...

Arguing with signposts... — Thu, 23 Jun 2005 19:20:16 +0000

SCOTUS: *!@%$@#$ property rights

Welcome, Instapundit readers!

Update II: I've moved this post to the top of the page. Please check out the other voices at the bottom of the post.

Update: The opinions are here (h/t SCOTUSblog)

The Supreme Court has ruled that cities can seiz...

By: Steve Verdon

Steve Verdon — Thu, 23 Jun 2005 19:10:36 +0000

Dang it James!

I was working on this...oh well. I should get two post if not more, IMO.

By: Jay

Jay — Thu, 23 Jun 2005 19:00:59 +0000

A while ago when I saw you hand't posted on this yet, the following exchange was heard here:

Me: "James must be in a meeting."
Deb: "I was thinking the same thing!"