$upreme Court: It's Okay to $teal Property From Private Citizen Peter & Give to Private Developer Paul

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that local government can seize people's homes & businesses for private development projects. The case involved the town of New London, Conn., which wanted to bulldoze homes & businesses so that a private developer could build a hotel, health club & offices. New London officials argued that such development would boost economic growth (code word for more tax revenue) & outweighed homeowner's property rights. Egregiously, the Supreme Court agreed. This is outrageous.

This is an ominous ruling which strikes at the heart of the concept of private property ownership in America. Property ownership has been the foundation & roots in establishing this free & democratic country of ours. Communist governments owned all property. There was no such thing as private ownership in those countries. There was no such thing as freedom, either.

Owning land has always been an absolute in America, except in the realm of "eminent domain." Eminent domain is an accepted concept enumerated in the Constitution whereby private property is confiscated, with "just compensation" to the owner, if the land is for public use, i.e., a new highway built or a public recreation center or park built. But note - for public use. The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution says in regard to property, "....nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation". Nowhere does it say "taken for private use". The dullards on the Supreme Court have contorted, bent & rationalized the meaning of the Fifth Amendment to fit their own purposes, just like Roe v. Wade & just like the non-existent "Separation of Church & State" clause they themselves put into the Constitution. This is liberal judicial activism at its worse.

The New London case involves turning over privately owned land to a private developer who will make a profit on his investment with the land taken from you. This is not a blighted area of New London either. Decent Victorian homes & businesses that have been there generations are getting the heave-ho.

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor disagreed with the ruling, stating, "Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random. The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms."

She is right. The ruling opens the door to influence peddling & corruption & ahem, political "contributions", whereby developers exert pressure on or pay off city officials to get condemnation of private property that the developer wants.

If Burger King wants your property & the city decides that it is in the economic interest of the public, goodbye to your house. You may have been willing to sell to Burger King at a high price if BK was willing to pay. But now you are robbed of even that bonanza. Instead, you get "just compensation" & the developer saves a lot of money. Of course, the city will make the tidy profit you would have made when city sells your land to the developer. Now towns, cities & developers will be licking their collective chops at the opportunities the Supreme Court availed them.

No more will a hospital or casino or strip mall have to dicker with you for a lower asking price. They just whisper the words "eminent domain" in your ear as a threat. You give the town council a hard time over some issue? Payback time, baby - your house is now a gas station. And what of churches? They get the heave-ho also? The potential for abuse is real thanks to the jackasses on the Supreme Court.

In the 5-4 ruling, we wonder how 5 supposed intelligent justices could come to their conclusions. But then, we're talking liberal judges here. These 5 justices have done immeasurable harm to the cherished belief of land ownership. It is the "1,000 cuts" doctrine; freedom taken away one cut at a time, hardly noticeable, until we wake one day with little or no freedoms.

We can't stress enough how enormous this ruling is. Who will be affected? The poor homeowner & poor renter, the middle-class homeowner & the middle-class renter & the small businessman will be the victims. But at least we have liberal 5 justices who can be certain that where they live there will never be a "Burger King Soon to Come" sign.

These 5 justices have sold out American citizens for the greedy manipulations of local governments & businesses. Congress needs to rectify this travesty with appropriate legislation or a Constitutional Amendment. We'll wait & see if the dullards in Congress really want to serve the citizens.