A thoughtful compilation and analysis of some important, but underreported and under-researched news stories, with particular focus on keeping the People informed about all Enemies, Foreign and Domestic.
-----The 'Civil Flag' -- Forgotten Flag, or Flag of Fraud and Fiction?
-----Status of the 'Fair Tax Act of 2005' (H.R. 25; S 25)
Weights & Measures:
Anyone is free to comment on this site. Therefore, outgoing links posted by third parties may contain objectional material, but do not reflect the views of this site's owner. When linking to an outside page, links should not direct the reader to nude pictures, erotic stories, or other forms of pornography. Nor should links appear to sites using excessive profanity. Use common sense. If you would be ashamed for your church-going grandmother to see it, you shouldn't link to it. In addition to not linking to any inappropriate material, commenters should watch their language, else their posts will be deleted. Likewise, libelous statements will not be tolerated.
Tuesday, May 10, 2005
Eminent Domain, Kelo v. New London: Keeping it Fresh in Our minds Column dated 05 May 2005
No, the verdict isn't in yet. I don't think that the publication of this editorial is timely, personally, since there have been no new developments in the case. However, what this editorial does do is to keep Kelo v. New London fresh in our minds. In case you were under a rock between December and February, this case is currently being deliberated upon by the Supreme Court and involves the taking of private land by a city. The reason this case is being litigated is because the city of New London, Connecticut thinks that the definition of public use (for eminent domain) includes giving private land to other private developers. The case before the Supreme Court is going to decide whether this sort of activity should be permitted . . . hopefully (though I suspect the Supremes will get out of protecting private property rights by handing down a ruling that is so narrowly tailored as to fit only circumstances identical to this case). I'm not going to repeat myself on this case (I have included all of my prior posts on this topic below), but I will restate my position that theft is wrong. It doesn't matter that the state is doing it, and it doesn't matter if the wronged parties are being compensated. If I steal your car, I would be charged with grand theft -- even if I paid you for the car -- because I took it without your consent.
The author of this article is a retired superior court judge. He is calling for, at the very least, a reasonableness test before eminent domain can be used. I don't think this goes far enough, but it is better than the current standard, which seems to be that if a taking can be connected to a public purpose, no matter how remote, then eminent domain shall be allowed. "Reasonableness," says the judge, "is a test we use in other areas of the law. It would be appropriate to use it here."
---------Kelo v. New London: Eminent domain before high court, Transferring private land to other private hands at issue
---------Kelo v. New London: Eminent domain abuses before Supreme Court; New guidelines suggested
---------Kelo v. New London, Eminent Domain: Do You Think It's Okay for the City To Give Your Land to a Developer for 'Increased Tax Revenue'?
---------Related Case: More Eminent Domain Abuse in Norwood, Ohio; Mayor Tom Williams Compares Property Owners to Criminals
---------Related Case: Eminent domain takes aim at life's work: Man's business to be taken to make way for a 'Media Box' _____________________________________________
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen."