Friday, June 24, 2005

The Supreme Court needs an enema

In a decision that completely baffles me, the Supreme Court decided in 'Kelo et al v. City of New London' that governmental entities may use eminent domain to grab property from private owners for development by other private entities.
In the past, it's been accepted that eminent domain was usable when developing something for governmental purposes, an airport, train station, etc., but the property owners were expected to receive 'reasonable compensation' for the property from the government.
But in Kelo, Pfizer was wanting to develop a research lab at the site, and these homeowners wouldn't sell. The argument was made that the lab is for the overall best interests of the community and thus eminent domain was proper.
Didn't we fight a WAR over this stuff about 200-something years ago? Wasn't that a huge portion of the argument with England, that the King had the right to take private property for his own use or the use of people of his choosing?
Sandra Day O'Connor, whose decisions usually tend toward the liberal side of the spectrum wrote the dissent in this case and it was a scathing dissent. The rest of the usually conservative justices sided with her, but the 'usual suspects' of liberal, 'government loving' scumbag justices (Ginsberg, Kennedy, et al) sided with the developers/corporations. The interesting thing is that libs are always slamming conservatives for being in bed with corporations. Go figure.

I'll post more about this later after I read the entire decision, but this cannot stand. We cannot be a country where private property rights mean nothing when faced with some bureaucratic decision.

No comments: