The Day: Two Sides Of Eminent Domain (Kelo vs New London, CT)

[Larkspur]

Fort Trumbull plaintiffs, New London Development Corp (NLDC) make their cases in Hartford

http://www.theday.com/eng/web/news/re.aspx?re=49A77160-72CA-4F7C-9A7A-1C56E25DB483

Hartford— A legislative hearing Thursday on eminent domain and New London's Fort Trumbull redevelopment plan was scheduled to take three hours and run as smoothly as a first-year law lecture.

Instead, it took nearly five hours as attorneys on both sides of the dispute angrily hashed out the ideological and factual differences that carried the case of Susette Kelo, her neighbors and their city to the U.S. Supreme Court.

For most of the legislators present, the hearing before the Planning and Development and Judiciary committees was a refresher course, a Cliffs Notes account of a years-long struggle that pitted municipal and state officials bent on renovating a threadbare corner of New London against a small band of holdouts who insist they simply want to keep their homes.

Kelo was there with her fellow plaintiffs, trembling as she read from a prepared statement. She was consoled by Scott Bullock, the senior attorney at the nonprofit Institute for Justice, the libertarian law firm, who unsuccessfully argued the homeowners' case before the Supreme Court this spring.

Officials of the New London Development Corp. and the city defended their seizure of 15 properties at Fort Trumbull, saying they had followed the applicable state law –– allowing government takings for the purpose of economic development –– to the letter, and had done so in a desperate attempt to save the city.

They argued that the passionate dissent of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who warned that “the specter of condemnation hangs over all property,” has sown unreasonable fears nationwide.

“I'm here to tell you that is not the case in the state of Connecticut,” said Thomas J. Londregan, the city attorney. “That is not your law. Your law does not say every home in Connecticut can be taken solely to give it to someone else who will pay more taxes. That is not your law.”
<SNIP>
The main opposition to this ruling is by Republicans and Libertarians.

Here's the City of New London's web site http://ci.new-london.ct.us/index.html

[Ian David]

1. Related post: Limbaugh talking about the Eminent Domain case

Limbaugh said, "This would never have happened with a court of conservative judges."

He said that it was THE LIBERALS that were behind the eminent domain thing in Connecticut.

I tried to call-in, but couldn't get through.

I wanted to say, "Look, everyone I know on the liberal Democratic Underground blog is as pissed-off about it as you are. Liberals and Democrats own houses too, you know. We don't want OUR houses taken away, either. This is one of those things that Liberals and Conservatives can agree on. The enemy here is CORPORATIONS and BUSINESS INTERESTS."


More:

I happened upon Limbaugh talking about the Eminent Domain case
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4212002&mesg_id=4212250