Supreme Court...Govt. can take your property against your will

[spanone]

for a shopping mall or any other tax base. Welcome to Democracy bush* style.

~snip~WASHINGTON (AP) -- A divided Supreme Court ruled that local governments may seize people's homes and businesses against their will for private development in a decision anxiously awaited in communities where economic growth conflicts with individual property rights.
~snip~


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/23/politics/23wire-scotus.html?hp&ex=1119585600&en=5036788eb4cc9d17&ei=5094&partner=homepage

[Ron Mexico]

1. You blame this on Bush?

Look at the judges who voted for this and against it. We got stabbed in the back by our own, and people like Scalia and Thomas actually had the right idea. How is this Bush's fault?

[spanone]

8. I blame the whole facist atmosphere on bush*. He sets the climate.

[Ron Mexico]

11. Bush didn't appoint any of those five fucks.

For God's sake, we've hit a point where Scalia and Thomas are the voices of reason.

[spanone]

19. You don't think the current administration has any effect on Supreme Court

I don't think SC works in a vacuum.

[Ron Mexico]

22. If that's the case, why

didn't Thomas and Scalia vote with the five fucks? Why didn't O'Connor, who is generally a swing vote? Why wasn't it 9-0 if the supposed "left" judges voted for big developers? Why didn't Bush's supposed influence have "his" judges marching in lockstep?

[getmeouttahere]

20. Yeah, one ONE issue!

[expatriot]

15. No, we'd have this without Bush.... It is a slippery slope we've been

going down for years. Governments have always siezed property for public projects (freeways, schools, airports) and it is always down in the name of "the public good" what is new (but has been happening for years" is siezing property in the name of economic and/or real estate development being down in the name of the "public good." It's like mayors and city councils playing out SimCity in real life.

[Ron Mexico]

23. That's what I was getting at.

This would have happened under any administration, it would have happened if Kerry had won, it would have happened if Clinton could have served four terms.

I guess I just prefer to blame Bush for what he deserves blame for. That's a shitload in itself, so there's no point in blaming him for this. If we're going to blame the warmongering dildo for this, I might as well blame him for the flat tire I had on Monday.

[expatriot]

24. Yes, me too...god knows there is enough stuff to throw at his doorstep nt

[4_TN_TITANS]

27. Exellent posts Ron Mexico...

and welcome to DU :hi:

We're strung tight enough to blame an earthquake on BushCo (lack of environmental policies created the conditions for tectonic shift, etc.). Thanks for the reminder that we have to police our own just as much as we need to blame the dark side....

[waynew706]

2. Stones throw away....

from complete Dictatorship by this POS. Someone better act soon to stop this bunch of scum bags from suceeding.

[GreenPartyVoter]

4. Welcome to DU

[GreenPartyVoter]

3. Lovely. *sigh*

[getmeouttahere]

5. Well, I'm glad I don't own anything....

how is this going to encourage people to invest in homes/businesses?

[woo me with science]

6. Pay closer attention.

The LIBERAL justices voted for this.

[kevinmc]

7. "The Bush" wins again n/t

[expatriot]

9. I have nothing against the power of eminent domain for public works

I am all for the power of eminent domain for public projects (i.e. roads, schools) but this is obviously very evil. This especially effects poor neighborhoods more often than not since they can more easily be declared "blighted" and they have less political representation.

[Ron Green]

16. I agree with you. The big difference is between public works

(for which the State always has had, and always should have, the right of way and eminent domain) and private development, which is just another way of giving the government to the wealthy. I don't understand why the various justices came down on this as they did.

[MadHound]

10. Geez, I find myself in agreement with Thomas and Scalia on this one

Sorry but the term "public good" should not cover private developments that boost tax revenue. This just makes it easier for corporations like WalMart to roll into town, and roll over the residents.

Sad to say, I think that there will be some blood shed due to this ruling, people become quite attached to their land and homes. Just ask some of the farmers who had their land seized during the seventie and eighties.

[Ron Mexico]

14. That's the whole point!

When we hit the point where Scalia and Thomas are the voices of reason, we are completely fucked.

[sui generis]

12. well, the republicans are finally acting like republicans

and the other justices have been drinking koolaid.

Here's the basic stupidity and how the first challenge will lose . . . again.

It's a regressive tax paid for by the private property owner being preyed upon.

Market Value compensation is inadequate. To relocate to another big four bedroom house on an acre of land within 10 minutes of downtown, Dallas couldn't afford to compensate me (or my neighbors). Any additional expenses I incur after carefully including my real estate investment in my financial planning becomes a "tax" upon my income as a result of their action.

Seize it fine - but I'll sue you for disproportionately affecting my income for an economic development that other Dallas residents are not required to pay for.

It is time to put term limits on the Supreme Court. We just can't have a bunch of senile old fucks in charge of interpreting the law.

(sorry fellow geezers, you know what I mean)

[dogday]

13. I knew this could be done when building highways

have seen this happen twice when highways were being built. City offers what they think is fair, owner does not have a choice....

[Clark2008]

17. This has all the paelo-conservatives in my area all

up in arms.

Good. They deserve the government they voted for.

Too bad the rest of us don't.

[Jack Rabbit]

18. Another day in Bush's America

Are men are created equal, but artificial persons are more equal than real ones.

[Walt Starr]

21. What a sad, sad day.

It's a sad day in America when Clarence Thomas, William Rhenquist, Sandra Day O'Connor, and Anthony "Big Tony the Hatchet" Scalia get it right and the rest get it wrong.

[jzodda]

25. You blame this on Bush???Excuse me but look who was majority!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Stevens wrote in an opinion joined by Justice Anthony Kennedy, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer.

WHO ARE THEY??????

They can try to take my property over my dead body....plain and simple...

[UdoKier]

26. This is one where we have common ground with the Freeps.

This is basically what Bush did when he tool all those people's land for a stadium in Dallas. Eminent domain should be STRICTLY for public projects, and even then, only for very important ones.

This is so appalling. Corps now have the right to confiscate homeowners' property.

This is so not America.

FUCK YOU, Whore Supreme Court.