U.S. Supreme Court to hear eminent domain case

[RZAL]

A mans home is no longer his castle under current eminent domain laws. The case of Kelo v. New London will go before the US Supreme Court today, lets hope the court will return a favorable ruling. http://www.supremecourtus.gov/

So what do you think, should the eminent domain law be use for the purpose of generating tax revenue for the government, or should it only be used in the more traditional sense?

Eminent domain

As early as 1795, the U.S. Supreme Court described the power of eminent domain—where the government takes someone’s property for a “public use”—as “the despotic power.” Eminent domain has the potential to destroy lives and livelihoods by uprooting people from their homes and businesspeople from their shops. With eminent domain, the government can force a couple in their 80s to move from their home of 50 years. Eminent domain is the power to evict a small family business, even if that means the business will never reopen.

The danger of such an extreme power led the authors of the U.S. Constitution and state constitutions to limit the power of eminent domain in two ways. First, the government had to pay “just compensation.” And second, even with just compensation, the government could take property only for “public use.” To most people, the meaning of “public use” is fairly obvious—things like highways, bridges, prisons, and courts.

No one—at least no one besides lawyers and bureaucrats—would think “public use” means a casino, condominiums or a private office building. Yet these days, that’s exactly how state and local governments use eminent domain—as part of corporate welfare incentive packages and deals for more politically favored businesses. This is the first report ever to document and quantify the uses and threats of eminent domain for private parties. http://www.castlecoalition.org/report/

Kelo v. New London
Lawsuit Challenging Eminent Domain Abuse in New London, Connecticut

Susette Kelo dreamed of owning a home that looked out over the water. She purchased and lovingly restored her little pink house where the Thames River meets the Long Island Sound in 1997, and has enjoyed the great view from its windows ever since. The Dery family, down the street from Susette, has lived in Fort Trumbull since 1895; Matt Dery and his family live next door to his mother and father, whose parents purchased their house when William McKinley was president. The richness and vibrancy of this neighborhood reflects the American ideal of community and the dream of homeownership.

Tragically, the City of New London is turning that dream into a nightmare.

In 1998, pharmaceutical giant Pfizer built a plant next to Fort Trumbull and the City determined that someone else could make better use of the land than the Fort Trumbull residents. The City handed over its power of eminent domain--the ability to take private property for public use—to the New London Development Corporation (NLDC), a private body, to take the entire neighborhood for private development. As the Fort Trumbull neighbors found out, when private entities wield government’s awesome power of eminent domain and can justify taking property with the nebulous claim of “economic development,” all homeowners are in trouble. http://www.ij.org/private_property/connecticut/

Eminent domain is a good example of the government slowly chipping away the property rights of the people.

 

[Bodacious]

I agree with this law if it is not abused, which it seemingly is in this case. Lets hope she wins.

 

[RZAL]

I agree with this law if it is not abused, which it seemingly is in this case. Lets hope she wins.

It's being abused all over the states.

(CBS)Cities across the country have been using eminent domain to force people off their land, so private developers can build more expensive homes and offices that will pay more in property taxes than the buildings they're replacing http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/09/26/60minutes/main575343.shtml

A report claims that 10,000 properties have been seized by cities for private developers.http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0509/p01s03-ussc.html

Seventeen homeowners in the Cleveland suburb of Lakewood are fighting to save their homes from the bulldozer. The culprits: their own city politicians. Lakewood officials claim that they need to redevelop the area to shore up the tax base, and they will not take no for an answer. Unfortunately, this scenario is fast becoming commonplace in cities and towns across the nation, as local officials use eminent domain to promote urban development at the expense of the very residents they represent.http://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/Articles/2003_09_30Melby.htm

Eminent Domain Abuse in Arizona: The Growing Threat to Private Propertyhttp://www.goldwaterinstitute.org/article.php/134.html

For half a century, unrestrained local and state governments have taken private property not for "public uses"—such as for bridges or public buildings—as permitted by the Constitution, but for private businesses in the name of "economic development." Private homes and businesses have been bulldozed, replaced by newer businesses and homes owned not by the public, but by private, politically powerful individuals and corporations.http://www.ij.org/private_property/

The list goes on and on, chances are it is already occurring in your on community....Private property owners beware

 

[K e r b e r o s]

I hope the person loosing they're home wins.

 

[RZAL]

I hope the person loosing they're home wins.

I agree.

There has never been a "free" society that survived past the point that it started to ignore the private property rights of its citizens.

One of the greatest threats to private property rights in this country is the newfound love that so many local governments have for the concept of eminent domain. It's as if politicians have just recently found out that they can use their governments monopoly on the use of deadly force to seize property from private individuals and then dispose of that property in a way that will be beneficial to the politician.

We have quite a little eminent domain saga going on in my home state of Georgia. Hall County lies north of Atlanta at the base of North Georgia foothills. In Hall County you will find $10 million homes on the shores of Lake Lanier, one of the busiest resort lakes in the nation.

Our story involves Eleanor Brazell. Eleanor is a widow. She owns 323 acres in Hall County. She has a contract to sell 311 of those acres to a developer who has plans for a "Sun City" type retirement community. Eleanor will keep the 12 acres on which she lives in a house built by her now-dead husband.
Our story also involves a Hall County Commissioner named Deborah Lynn. Commissioner Lynn wants Eleanor Brazell's property, all 323 acres of it. Lynn wants the property for a community center, a park and various other little goodies. It's interesting that Lynn says that the county needs the property for a park. A county-appointed citizen's park board says that they don't want that property for a park.

Well .. right now the Hall County commission is fighting like hell to get the condemnation of Brazell's property as fast as possible. They're in a hurry because two of the commissioners who are in favor of the seizure will be leaving office at the end of the month.

Now ... here's the real kicker. The contract with the private developer calls for a price of $8.4 million, and that contract allows Eleanor Brazell to keep the 12 acres on which her home sits. Hall County is only going to pay Eleanor Brazell $6.4 million ... PLUS, they're going to take the 12 acres for her home ... and all of this for a park the citizen's parks board says it doesn't want!

This is theft. No other description. This woman has a contract to sell 311 acres of her land, keep her home, and pocket $8.4 million. Along come the politicians who are telling her "No .. you're not going to keep your home, and you're not going to sell 311 acres for $8.4 million. We're going to force you off your property and out of your home and we're only going to give you $6.4 million. And you have no choice in the matter because we, not you, are allowed to use force to accomplish our goals."
Thieves in suits.

Now I know what a lot of you are saying. Big deal. The woman still walks away with six million bucks. How in the hell do you expect me to feel sorry for a woman with six million dollars? Fine. Try getting beyond your envy here. Hall County is seizing this woman's land for 25% less than its market value. Maybe next week the county will condemn some middle class homeowner's property. The homeowner might have a contract to sell his home for $160,000. Along comes the county with its condemnation privileges and pays the homeowner $120,000 instead. A nifty little 25% discount! Is that OK with you? http://boortz.com/nuze/200412/12162004.html

 

[firemachine69]

Hmmm. And people actually ask me why AR`s are necessary...