Home | Community | Message Board


Mycohaus
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1
Invisibleafoaf
CEO DBK?
 User Gallery

Registered: 11/08/02
Posts: 32,665
Loc: Ripple's Heart
property rights and imminent domain
    #3191017 - 09/28/04 12:13 PM (12 years, 2 months ago)

this seems like an interesting case.

I think it's a crock of shit...if the threshold for justifying
the theft of private property is merely the promise of
increased tax revenues for the local government, no
person's property is safe.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/09/28/seizing.property.ap/index.html

Supreme Court takes eminent domain case
Can cities take your property for economic development?

Tuesday, September 28, 2004 Posted: 11:28 AM EDT (1528 GMT

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to decide when governments may seize people's homes and businesses for economic development projects, a key question as cash-strapped cities seek ways to generate tax revenue.

At issue is the scope of the Fifth Amendment, which allows governments to take private property through eminent domain, provided the owner is given "just compensation" and the land is for "public use."

Susette Kelo and several other homeowners in a working-class neighborhood in New London, Connecticut, filed a lawsuit after city officials announced plans to raze their homes to clear the way for a riverfront hotel, health club and offices. The residents refused to budge, arguing it was an unjustified taking of their property.

They argued the taking would be proper only if it served to revitalize slums or blighted areas dangerous to the public.

New London contends the condemnations are proper because the development plans serving a "public purpose" -- such as boosting economic growth -- are valid "public use" projects that outweigh the property rights of the homeowners.

The Connecticut Supreme Court agreed with New London, ruling 4-3 in March that the mere promise of additional tax revenue justified the condemnation.

Nationwide, more than 1,000 properties were threatened or condemned between 1998 and 2002, according to the Institute for Justice, a Washington public interest law firm representing the New London homeowners.

In many cases, according to the group, cities are pushing the limits of their power to accommodate wealthy developers. Courts, meanwhile, are divided over the extent of city power, with seven states saying economic development can justify a taking and eight states allowing a taking only if it eliminates blight.

In New London, city officials envision replacing a stagnant enclave with commercial development that would attract tourists to the Thames riverfront, complementing an adjoining Pfizer Corp. research center and a proposed Coast Guard museum.

"The record is clear that New London was a city desperate for economic rejuvenation," the city's legal filing states, in asking the high court to defer to local governments in deciding what constitutes "public use."

According to the residents' filing, the seven states that allow condemnations for private business development alone are Connecticut, Kansas, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New York and North Dakota.

Eight states forbid the use of eminent domain when the economic purpose is not to eliminate blight; they are Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Maine, Montana, South Carolina and Washington.

Another three -- Delaware, New Hampshire and Massachusetts -- have indicated they probably will find condemnations for economic development alone unconstitutional, while the remaining states have not addressed or spoken clearly to the question.

=====================================================

Freeways and other public works I can understand, but commercial
endeavors like shopping malls and tourist traps are a whole other
story...


--------------------
All I know is The Growery is a place where losers who get banned here go.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineJameZTheNewbie
The Mahatma OfZalu

Registered: 05/24/02
Posts: 736
Loc: pass the gates of hell 2 ...
Last seen: 1 year, 10 months
Re: property rights and imminent domain [Re: afoaf]
    #3191032 - 09/28/04 12:22 PM (12 years, 2 months ago)

the constitution doesnt excist anymore when you put it next to a profit number.


--------------------
Mice have feelings


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: property rights and imminent domain [Re: JameZTheNewbie]
    #3191054 - 09/28/04 12:31 PM (12 years, 2 months ago)

But it's for the greater good! It's to increase tax revenue for the government and we all know bigger government means better government. Because more tax money means a stronger government and since government is synonomous with society, it means a stronger society... or something like that.


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineJameZTheNewbie
The Mahatma OfZalu

Registered: 05/24/02
Posts: 736
Loc: pass the gates of hell 2 ...
Last seen: 1 year, 10 months
Re: property rights and imminent domain [Re: Evolving]
    #3191063 - 09/28/04 12:33 PM (12 years, 2 months ago)

HAHA


--------------------
Mice have feelings


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinehound
newbie
Registered: 09/08/04
Posts: 154
Loc: NAPTOWN
Last seen: 12 years, 1 month
Re: property rights and imminent domain [Re: afoaf]
    #3192062 - 09/28/04 05:23 PM (12 years, 2 months ago)

Good post. I think you are right, with the reasoning that the town officials are using, no ones property would be safe. The New London officials are having a nice play on the words "public use" and "public purpose". They seem like two different things alltogether.

Hopefuly in the towns next elections the voters will remember these people and vote them out of office.


Edited by hound (09/28/04 05:24 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleafoaf
CEO DBK?
 User Gallery

Registered: 11/08/02
Posts: 32,665
Loc: Ripple's Heart
Re: property rights and imminent domain [Re: hound]
    #3192196 - 09/28/04 05:56 PM (12 years, 2 months ago)

welcome to PAL.


--------------------
All I know is The Growery is a place where losers who get banned here go.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinehound
newbie
Registered: 09/08/04
Posts: 154
Loc: NAPTOWN
Last seen: 12 years, 1 month
Re: property rights and imminent domain [Re: afoaf]
    #3192709 - 09/28/04 08:18 PM (12 years, 2 months ago)

Thanks. I wonder if this one will make it to the Supreme Court ? I hope that they continue to fight this thing.

So now in Conneticut tax revenues supercedes 5'th ammendment rights, it would seem that this would open up so much room for abuse by the State....a terrible decision.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Pure Capitalism
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Lallafa 7,326 76 12/26/01 01:30 AM
by Phred
* Looting and property rights silversoul7 304 2 09/01/04 08:09 AM
by fastfred
* U.S. Supreme Court rules it's okay for local governments to use eminent domain to seize property for JaguarWarrior101 534 2 06/24/05 01:41 PM
by Phred
* Article 31. Fundamental Human rights!! Read and sign this!!
( 1 2 all )
EmbracingShadows 1,246 22 04/14/09 12:29 PM
by Seuss
* Latest Draft of Iraqi Bill of Rights Phred 421 2 07/26/05 06:04 PM
by Phred
* War on Drugs -- and the Bill of Rights z@z.com 1,107 19 02/02/05 05:57 PM
by SWEDEN
* Serious question - Why is the right so popular on this board?
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 all )
ZeroRadius 9,840 172 01/17/07 09:16 PM
by zappaisgod
* Individual Vs Collective Rights
( 1 2 3 all )
GazzBut 3,140 45 03/02/05 10:52 PM
by Psychoactive1984

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Prisoner#1, Enlil
535 topic views. 0 members, 0 guests and 4 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:

Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2016 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.049 seconds spending 0.004 seconds on 14 queries.