Re: Eminent Domain can take your land away

From: barkofdelight <barkofdelight_at_yahoo.com_at_hypermail.org>
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 03:20:55 -0000

Henry wrote:
> I agree that this really did not constitute "public use".
> But this isn't *that* horrible. The local legislative
> and executive branch still have to sign off, even if the
> legislative won't chime in.

I have to agree here. Although I disagree with the
actual decision in the case, I see the S. Court decision
more as saying "the law as written doesn't give a
clear line as to what qualifies as for the public
good and what doesn't. That's up to the community to
decide, or the state."

[Of course I didn't read the actual text of the
 decision, so my interpretation is probably full
 of it.]

I don't really see the difference when an area is
labelled as "blighted" (whatever that means). It's
a slippery slope that we've slipped upon.

But what's curious to me is the emotion that this
has generated. I really didn't expect the kind of
reaction, from both liberal and conservative camps.
Some people expected the reverse vote, in that
this could easily be thought of as pro-business and
pro-state's rights. Very curious.

It's interesting what these things reveal in us. In
this case, the territorial imperative comes out with
a roar! Deep in our lizard brain ("bottom scoop")
this drive must be a very a strong one!

Bark!
Received on 2005-06-30 20:21:13