Supreme Court Upholds Expanded Concept of Eminent Domain

RE:Supreme Court Upholds Expanded Concept of Eminent Domain

Anonymous — Fri, 28 Jul 2006 11:00:00 GMT

I believe Rural Development starts years in advance in preparation for "prescription" water rights and eminent domain. Landowners should be vigilant regarding their property and wildlife habitats, springs, and streams. I also think grants and easements need to be reevaluated regarding the secrecy issue to protect participants. Maybe we need to protect older people who have worked very hard to have a home to have peace of mindnot fear of government taking what they worked for all their life.

RE:Supreme Court Upholds Expanded Concept of Eminent Domain

sandy mare — Thu, 29 Jun 2006 11:00:00 GMT

I am against eminent domain and would like to see it stopped once and for all. Please include me in names banning this kind of abuse and power. Thank you. Sandy.

RE:Supreme Court Upholds Expanded Concept of Eminent Domain

Business as Usual — Fri, 12 May 2006 11:00:00 GMT

The Law of Eminent Domain is as antiquated as our system of government. We have gone nowhere except backwards. Work hard and set yourself up for the Carpetbaggers supported by federal and local governments so the land you develope is easier for them to clear, cheaper that way. First it was Native Americans, the French, the English then the Mexicans. Now the government has turned on its own. They're Carpetbaggers and Nazi's under a false banner of freedom and prosperity, for them, not us.

RE:Supreme Court Upholds Expanded Concept of Eminent Domain

Anonymous — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 13:00:00 GMT

This is achieving economic devolopment. If it doesn't, than that's up to the courts to catch it. There's specific process set up so that if the government doesn't use this power justly than they will be stopped. The constitution states that they can use eminent domain if there's due process, and it meets public use. It doesn't say greater public use, if the public can use it, it can use it. As for the property issue, the government isn't saying that you can't own property, just relocating you.

RE:Supreme Court Upholds Expanded Concept of Eminent Domain

Jeani — Thu, 26 Jan 2006 13:00:00 GMT

Do a search for "Lost Liberty" hotel. There is a movement to seize Justice David Souter's home to build the "Lost Liberty" Hotel. Make this Supreme Court Justice live with his own ruling or reverse his own decision! You all want to put your money where your mouths are? Join the pledge to stay at the "Liberty". This comes to a vote in March 2006 in Weare, N.H.

RE:Supreme Court Upholds Expanded Concept of Eminent Domain

AAA — Thu, 29 Dec 2005 13:00:00 GMT

read the justifications of the Kelo V. New London Case, upon what this case is REALLY talking about and why these "crazy judges" did what they did. eminent domain doesn't mean that your house is automatically for sale. due process of law is needed. When they find that the need to take property is for the public good, in which case eminent domain is absolutely needed for overall societal welfare, then itz justified.

RE:Supreme Court Upholds Expanded Concept of Eminent Domain

rose — Sun, 20 Nov 2005 13:00:00 GMT

Eminent domain is just a ploy to make Senior Citizens homeless or hopelessly in debt for the rest of their lives. Those who bought home 45 years ago will never get enough to pay for a home at todays market values. Most of these people can't even afford medicene, let alone mortgages. Not mention heat , air, food or other utilies.

RE:Supreme Court Upholds Expanded Concept of Eminent Domain

stargirl — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 11:00:00 GMT

To join in the fight to have the Kelo decision overturned, go to the Institute for Justice Castle Coalition. The IJ represented Susette Kelo. They are one group leading this fight to restore the law and the Constitution for what it actually says.

RE:Supreme Court Upholds Expanded Concept of Eminent Domain

Peggy — Sun, 28 Aug 2005 11:00:00 GMT

How can we fight this? This is critical to fight and change this Supreme court decision. This should be top of our list to do something about.

RE:Supreme Court Upholds Expanded Concept of Eminent Domain

Scott — Tue, 12 Jul 2005 11:00:00 GMT

The public reaction is remarkably ahistorical and out of proportion. This is certainly NOT first time that the courts have supported eminent domain. This broader interpretation of public use to include private activity serving the public interest has a long precedent (as opposed to a narrower view that only includes explicit public use). In addition, people also miss the exceptional nature of this case, that the court gave great weight to the public scrutiny of this development project.

RE:Supreme Court Upholds Expanded Concept of Eminent Domain

Gh — Fri, 08 Jul 2005 11:00:00 GMT

Everyone - particularly our congress - forgets that a speedy impeachment of at least 5 justices would cure this problem for many decades to come. Robert Bork was correct when he said that the real problem of the supreme court was that most of the justices lacked the intelligence for the job. Benefitting one little city and one developer is not worth gutting the Constitution - and gutting it forever. Really stupid.

RE:Supreme Court Upholds Expanded Concept of Eminent Domain

Doyle Smith — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 11:00:00 GMT

For those who want to blame Bush, get real. Both parties care about the money, NOT you. Both parties try to keep you confused so you cant see the parties are taking care of their rich friends. Remember that companies cant vote, the big shots only have one vote. Problem is, you have to think. Stop voting party lines. Listen, compare, find out where their bias is and make up your own mind. We need Statesmen, not party liners.

RE:Supreme Court Upholds Expanded Concept of Eminent Domain

Carole Landaiche — Wed, 06 Jul 2005 11:00:00 GMT

Pathetic, and communistic. This demonstrates to all Americans these deciders do live in ivory towers, above us all, above the law, above what happens. There is a move to grab Senator Souters 100 y/o 2 story house to build a hotel. Great. Let s see how he likes the decision he made. These 4 guys should be taken out of the justice system. Big Brother is alive and well. Cameras everywhere, so many stupid laws, the jails are packed, and by the way ... Am I still in America?

RE:Supreme Court Upholds Expanded Concept of Eminent Domain

Randy — Mon, 04 Jul 2005 11:00:00 GMT

This ruling follows most other US trends over the last few decades. Any issue concerning money will always be resolved in favor of the developers and others having money and/or political influence. So much for a country for the people, by the people. The people no longer count. When is the last time someone important was elected by the popular vote? Its all money.

RE:Supreme Court Upholds Expanded Concept of Eminent Domain

Mike — Sun, 03 Jul 2005 11:00:00 GMT

My biggest problem with this ruling is that it opens the door to kickbacks and other illegal activities. Can you imagine the shmoosing that will now occur between big developers and local authorities? Make no mistake about it, this ruling is ALL about money in the pocket of private corporations with the blessing of the local authority. And if they dont have the blessing of the local authority, they can buy it!