A dangerous expansion of eminent domain?
You’re going to love this. We know that the government can condemn your property and claim it “for public use, in exchange for payment of fair market value” (more). But now there’s a case coming before the Supreme Court that would, if some real estate weasels and the New London, CT local officials who appear to work for them win, allow the government to seize your property and hand it over to private developers. One more time – the government could take your land and sign it over to a corporate interest.
At issue is whether governments can forcibly seize homes and businesses, for private economic development. Under a practice known as eminent domain, a person’s property may be condemned and the land converted for a greater “public use.” It has traditionally been employed to eliminate slums, or to build highways, schools or other public works.
As the CNN article explains, the practice under review isn’t unheard of, but now it’s finally going to get some well-deserved scrutiny from the Court.
Being something of a strict constructionist in principle, I’m having a hell of a time trying to imagine what kind of demented reading of the Constitution would afford the government the power to do any such thing, but what do I know – I’m just a simple country boy. But as a practical matter, it’s bad enough having to worry – in our current business-dominated political climate – about government seizing property for questionable public use. Now I have to worry about Hizzoner and a bought-up city council condemning property so it can be handed over the mayor’s corrupt real estate broker brother-in-law?!
Please, will somebody with a law degree please illuminate me here?
lullaby pit 
Eminent Domain
The right-wing talk radio boys are pretty much all over this one, Samuel, and they are on the side of the property owners, not the developers.
In the New London case, “public use” is being interpreted to include increasing tax collections.
You’re right — it is an outrage of the egregious type.
Brother Paul
Oklahoma City
Re: Eminent Domain
It’s been awhile since me and the RW talk boys agreed, but as I said, I have a powerful strict constructionist streak in me that just won’t shut up.
Re: Eminent Domain
indeed. there was even a blurb about this on fox news. one of the anchorpeople (well-known, though i can’t remember his name) called the local officials “socialist city planners” without even batting an eyelash.
try to twist your head around that one. i think there was a tom tomorrow cartoon about this last week. 😛
Re: Eminent Domain
Well, hell, maybe if this is an issue we can ALL agree on – call it a purple issue, huh? – we can band together to nip this Wal*Mart infestation in the bud.
Of course, I won’t be wagering any of MY money on it….
Re: Eminent Domain
yes, but it’s hard to unite when the rhetoric patrol is continuously alienating the left, even when we *agree* on something. argh.