Eminent Domain
While I can’t write quite as eloquently as Jim, I think a brief post regarding a recent Supreme Court decision is required, and I’ll let Jim expand with his thoughts.
Recently, a case went to the Supreme Court in which a city wished to uproot a good number of people from their homes in order to then turn the property over to a private developer. Their reasoning is that the developer’s planned hotel would bring in more taxes than the homes thereby helping the “public good.” By a 5-4 margin, the Supreme Court decided this was a valid argument. I, for one, am not amused.
To see the opinions, both majority and dissenting, check out this link http://straylight.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/04-108.ZS.html.
However, never let it past some brilliant (read slightly off kilter) people to then turn this into a mockery, all be it an amusing one.
Freestar Media has decided that since Eminent Domain allows for a flexible interpretation of “public good” as well as quite a few other laws, they have requested the city of Weare exercise their right to higher revenue by excising property from on Mr. Souter, who just happened to read the Supreme Court’s majority opinion. You can see the letter and their press release at their website. There is also a petition for anyone interested in staying at the afore mentioned hotel.
While the interpretation of Eminent Domain seems to require economic blight, I think this makes for an interesting story nonetheless.
Jim, your thoughts?
Explore posts in the same categories: Uncategorized
June 30th, 2005 at 5:37 pm
While I can understand the need for higher tax revenues, and also for changes in a town’s zoning reflecting the changing population climate, the Bill of Rights says that “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” It seems that in a case like this “just compensation” would include the last appraised tax value of both the house and land, as well as relocation expenses, and possibly even an additional stipend for a person’s trouble. I know that none of these homeowners were offered anything close to that. And that is my main problem with the whole issue.