June 23, 2005


Shit on a fucking stick. I can't even read this SCOTUS Kelo decision without cursing, so you'll forgive me if I rant and rave on this blog. Or you won't. Either way, I'll sleep fine at night. Excerpt:

The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that local governments may seize people's homes and businesses - even against their will - for private economic development.

It was a decision fraught with huge implications for a country with many areas, particularly the rapidly growing urban and suburban areas, facing countervailing pressures of development and property ownership rights.

The 5-4 ruling represented a defeat for some Connecticut residents whose homes are slated for destruction to make room for an office complex. They argued that cities have no right to take their land except for projects with a clear public use, such as roads or schools, or to revitalize blighted areas.

As a result, cities now have wide power to bulldoze residences for projects such as shopping malls and hotel complexes in order to generate tax revenue.

Are you kidding me? Are you fucking kidding me?! Is there any locale in the entire US where a county wouldn't receive more revenue from a shopping center or store than from property taxes? I'll probably need to move there if I want to keep my house.

Fuck these money-grubbing elected officials who sanction activity such as this, and fuck everyone who says "It's okay". It's NOT okay.

Here are the SCOTUS members voting for the majority decision:

John Paul Stevens
Justice Anthony Kennedy
David H. Souter
Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Stephen G. Breyer

Now tell me again why the Senate battle for judicial confirmations isn't important. This country needs a different type of judge on the bench to revisit and overturn this decision. And it will be appealed again once the makeup of SCOTUS changes.

By the way, will someone bitchslap George Bush the elder for putting David Souter on the bench? Please?

Update: Kevin at Wizbang is a bit more restrained in his post. The Puppy Blender is succinct in his analysis: OUR STATIST SUPREME COURT STRIKES AGAIN: They've had quite a run lately.

No shit.

Update: Will Collier has more. Excerpt:

This is a dreadful decision. If politicians have the right to take your private property and give it to somebody else just because the other guy claims that he can generate more taxes from it, then property rights have ceased to exist in the US.

The localities are still required to pay "a just price" when one of these takings occurs, but the price even a willing seller would be able to get from his property just took a huge hit. All a developer has to do now is make a lowball offer and threaten to involve a bought-and-paid-for politician to take the property away if the owner doesn't acquiesce.

Update: Michelle Malkin has a roundup of related links.

Update: I'll post more links as soon as I have time, but I believe that Blogs of War has it exactly right:

Have a home on nice corner lot? Better hope that a fast food chain doesn't take an interest in it. Live near an airport? Holiday Inn would love to build a high-rise hotel where your home now stands. Corrupt, cheaply bought, local officials now hold your family's future in their hands.

This is the breeding ground of a revolution

: Arguing with Signposts has a rather large collection of related links.

Acidman makes the best assessment of the Kelo decision:

I call bullshit on the Supreme Court.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 12:16 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 595 words, total size 4 kb.

1 You know what's killing me? Granted the Clinton appts to SCOTUS would vote for this, but so did a Reagan appointee. Jumping Jehosephat, did they put, "From each according to his abilities..." in that decision?

Posted by: LCVRWC at June 23, 2005 03:11 PM (L3qPK)

2 On to practical matters. I believe they said that States had the right to put the smackdown on what localities could steal. Time to start lobbying for such things at the state level since the Feds refuse to protect us. God. This is like the opposite of the Civil Rights battles of the 60's.

Posted by: Harvey at June 23, 2005 03:53 PM (ubhj8)

3 Harvey, I can't take any consolation that SCOTUS ruled that States can legislate limits to property seizure. It's like taking consolation that our cellmate at least uses KY Jelly during our nightly ass-raping. States will never limit it given that SCOTUS has blessed the property seizure.

Posted by: Lycan at June 23, 2005 04:28 PM (dHD6C)

4 I gotta side with Lycan on this one, Harvey. We'll here our state elected officials proclaiming, "SCOTUS has spoken; we must obey. Now give your effing house. Right now!"

Posted by: physics geek at June 23, 2005 04:34 PM (Xvrs7)

5 Truly a dark day for the country...

Posted by: jimmyb at June 24, 2005 01:56 PM (zIl1J)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
21kb generated in CPU 0.05, elapsed 0.1556 seconds.
91 queries taking 0.135 seconds, 237 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.