Information
ARCHIVES
Thursday, June 23, 2005
By Steven L. Taylor

Or, so said a 5-4 majority of the Supreme Court today in Kelo v. New London: Supreme Court Rules Cities May Seize Homes .

According to the ruling, the power of eminent domain now includes allowing local government to seize private property if they think it might be a good idea in terms of general economic development.

In short: this radically increases the power of local governments and diminishes individual rights–indeed, gives local governments the power to seize the homes of private citizens because said government thinks it is a good idea.

I however, think it is a pretty bad idea, and concur with O’Connor’s dissent:

O’Connor, who has often been a key swing vote at the court, issued a stinging dissent, arguing that cities should not have unlimited authority to uproot families, even if they are provided compensation, simply to accommodate wealthy developers.

“Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random,” she wrote. “The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms.”

For more outrage and frustration see Bryan S. at Arguing with Signposts.

Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments/Trackbacks (9)|
The views expressed in the comments are the sole responsibility of the person leaving those comments. They do not reflect the opinion of the author of PoliBlog, nor have they been vetted by the author.

9 Responses to “Property Rights? You Don’t Need No Stinkin’ Property Rights”

  1. The Misanthrope Says:

    Another sad day for this country and the working people who strive their little piece of the American dream.

  2. Jay Says:

    Tried to trackback but you aren’t accepting them from me. Nor are Wizbang or Arguing with Signposts for some reason. Consider this sort of a trackback.

  3. Arguing with signposts… » SCOTUS: *[email protected]%[email protected]#$ property rights Says:

    [...] more money. Have you ever met a government that didn’t want more money? Me neither. Dr. Steven Taylor: In short: this radically increases the power of local governments and diminishes individual [...]

  4. Isaac B2 Says:

    I’m no Libertarian (yet), but developments like this make me cringe… as the government gets bigger and more powerful (no matter who’s in charge) it means less rights for us citizens.

  5. Joseph Bittengle Says:

    What we aren’t looking at is the fact that this was pretty much a split case. 5-4, thats it. No, I am not saying the Supreme Court was right and that the government is getting to be stronger than ever. But realize that this is going to simmer for some time and most likely burn out as a time in our history that was seemingly falable.

  6. pennywit Says:

    Stephen, before you get too hot under the collar, check Kennedy’s concurrence.

    –|PW|–

  7. Politics In Alabama Says:

    A Sad Sad Day

    Checking in over PoliBlog I read his report of the Supreme Court Ruling of eminent domain were now the governement can take anything they want – jsut as long as they prove its good for Economic development. I really caannot see how they ruled in favor…

  8. Truth. Quante-fied. Says:

    Private Takings Authorized by Supreme Court

    I thought I’d blog about the Supreme Court decision handed down today that I hope even the liberals out there lament (if not spew out a mouthful of soda in disgust like I did). Today the Court ruled that local governments could not only take private …

  9. The Q Speaks Says:

    “Capitalism Is the New Communism”

    What is Kelo? I’m glad you asked. I thought Raich was bad. Kelo is far, far worse.


blog advertising is good for you

Visitors Since 2/15/03


Blogroll
Wikio - Top of the Blogs - Politics
---


Advertisement

Advertisement


Powered by WordPress