The American Dream is DEAD... RIP

[Number13]

This deserves it's own thread...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050623/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_seizing_property

WASHINGTON - A divided Supreme Court ruled Thursday that local governments may seize people's homes and businesses against their will for private development in a decision anxiously awaited in communities where economic growth often is at war with individual property rights.

<<snip>>

 

[JudgeWapner]

That blows.

 

[Redneckman]

Absolutely amazing. I can't believe Kennedy voted for this shit.

 

[Number13]

As Claire Wolfe would say...

IT'S TIME!!!

 

[JudgeWapner]

O'Conner once again demonstartes why she is my favorite justice.

 

[D2bets]

I agree with you guys. This is wrong. It's one thing if it is for schools or other some other necessary public community purposes, but not for a private hotel, health club and offices. And I don't see how the Court can basically say that it's not for the Court to judge whether the standard is met. That's ridiculous. If the courts can't decide it then the cities can run roughshod and do whatever they please. The Court clearly expanded the line in this case, without any good justification. Really bad decision, in my opinion.

And this basically gives full authority for taking for really anything. If hotels and offices are OK, then anything would be said to be for economic development. They wouldn't do anything if they didn't at least hope for economic development.

 

[D2bets]

I think "The American Dream is Dead" is a bit of an exaggeration, but it doesn seem to be getting replaced day by day with the Corporate Dream.

 

[Number13]

 

[D2bets]

So could Hollywood studios now invade neighborhoods and take over property to make movies because it will lead to economic development?

 

[CAPNCRUNCH]

So could Hollywood studios now invade neighborhoods and take over property to make movies because it will lead to economic development?

Everybody better join the NRA and get their AK's ready!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Whoson1st]

I wonder what the city has to prove about the economic development before seizing someone's home to build a whatever. Basically since your house is only a place to live in and doesn't serve the economy at all....it would seem they could seize the home for a Hamburger stand or anything that makes money. There must be some guidelines (at least I would hope so).

 

[Whoson1st]

I don't understand labels too well.... But which side would favor this decision of the cities taking your home.....Liberals or Conservatives?

I don't get it.

 

[Redneckman]

All you have to do is look at who voted for it on the Supreme Court. The four liberal nut cases voted for it, and got a semi conservative Kennedy to go along, therefore passing on a 5-4 vote.

 

[JudgeWapner]

Would not call any of the current judges on the Supreme Court a nut case. Not even Thomas.

 

[CAPNCRUNCH]

I wonder what the city has to prove about the economic development before seizing someone's home to build a whatever. Basically since your house is only a place to live in and doesn't serve the economy at all....it would seem they could seize the home for a Hamburger stand or anything that makes money. There must be some guidelines (at least I would hope so).

Does an abortion clinic qualify? :toast:

 

[Number13]

You can now call me an EX-LIBERAL!

here's to the Supreme Court :finger: :finger: :finger: :finger:

 

[Whoson1st]

I guess my political leanings, if that's a good term might be slightly "liberal". But if the Liberals approve this......I don't want to be one AT ALL!!!

 

[Whoson1st]

Does an abortion clinic qualify? :toast:

Don't know....Must be "SOME TYPE OF GUIDELINES".

 

[Redneckman]

Steven Brier, before being bitch slapped by Scalia on the issue, admitted to checking international law and rulings before ruling on cases before him on the Supreme Court. Has Brier ever heard of something called a CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA? I'm sorry, but I call the person who admits that type of behavior a liberal nut case, Mr. Wapner.

 

[D2bets]

This is a constitutional construction issue. Why does everything have to be classified liberal or conservative? The way I see it this is the little guy vs. big business. And as a liberal, I favor the little guy. If "conservatives" agree with me, then that's fantastic. There's plenty of decisions that the so-called "liberals" on the Court get "wrong", IMO, from a liberal perspective -- just take a look at the voting on the medical marijuana issue.

O'Connor got it right when she said that this gives dispropoprtionate influence and power to the "well-heeled."

This is about the ordinary citizen vs. the big and powerful.