p2pnet - rss feed: US cities can seize private land
p2pnet.net OT News:- America is now only a few steps away from turning into a country where individual freedoms fall totally to government control and vested corporate interests.
“Cities may bulldoze people’s homes to make way for shopping malls or other private development, a divided Supreme Court ruled Thursday, giving local governments broad power to seize private property to generate tax revenue,” says the Associated Press.
“New London was backed in its appeal by the National League of Cities, which argued that a city’s eminent domain power was critical to spurring urban renewal with development projects such Baltimore’s Inner Harbor and Kansas City’s Kansas Speedway. Under the ruling, residents still will be entitled to ‘just compensation’ for their homes as provided under the Fifth Amendment.”
The Supreme Court ruled five to four that local governments have the right to seize private property, “against the will of the owner if it leads to economic development that benefits the community,” says Voice of America, going on:
“The decision is expected to give local governments around the country more power to seize homes and businesses for economic growth projects such as shopping malls and hotels that would spur economic development and generate greater tax revenues.”
Protecting the poor
Homeowners in New London, Connecticut, sued to block the city from seizing their property so a river front hotel and other businesses could be built, says the VOA.
But Wesley Horton, a city lawyer, passes the decision off as a way to protect the poor and underprivileged.
The Supreme Court ruling will be, “a boon to spurring economic development in cities around the country,” the VOA has Horton stating:
“Otherwise, all you can do is go into blighted areas, which means you are picking on the poor people, the minority people and this means that economic development can go where it is best to go.”
‘Unlimited power’
New London homeowner Bill Von Winkle says he’ll refuse to leave his home. “This is bad for the country. Any home, any business can be taken,” he said.
Writing for the minority side, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor said cities, “should not have unlimited power to uproot families and that the main beneficiaries of the ruling will be wealthy developers and corporations who back the development projects,” says the VOA, adding:
“The decision takes into account the U.S. Constitution’s Fifth Amendment, which allows local governments to seize land for public use.”
The ruling will be seen as a model by developing ‘progressive’ states.
Something you think we should know? tips[at]p2pnet.net
See:-
Associated Press - Supreme Court Rules Cities May Seize Homes , June 23, 2005
Voice of America - US Supreme Court Rules on Property Seizures, June 23, 2005
June 24th, 2005 at 12:46 am
Next step, USA seizes Canada as a winter holiday resort in need of development.
June 24th, 2005 at 1:30 am
THIS SHOWS–BIG CAPITALIST WITH MONEY IN THERE POCKET THEY CAN BUY ANYTHING POLITICS, POLITICIAN ,LAWS,WHERE JUDGES ARE BUNCH OF JOKERS THATS WHY IN THIS WORLD POOR REMAINS POOR & RICH GETS RICHER
PEOPLE SHOULD GET UNITED ALL AT ONCE & SHOULD RAISE THEIR VOICE HOW CAN SOMEBODY TAKE THEIR HOME JUST FOR COMPENSATION ITS A SCAM ON THE NAME OF PUBLIC GOOD
June 24th, 2005 at 3:53 am
looks like the Nazis won WWII after all. It’s a sad day when the country that boasts about preserving freedom and democracy rules against it and takes away your basic rights in the name of government. Isn’t this similar to the British demanding more taxes and creating the American Revolution as a result? What are all you Americans going to do now?
June 24th, 2005 at 4:49 am
Ok, so now we’re gonna have cities extending their boundaries as far as they can get away with to bring more and more land under their direct control.
I can already see 2 or more cities over 100 miles apart arguing that their limits extend into each others territories and thus they “own” each other.
The lawyers are gonna love this. Every time i visit this site i’m more and more glad that i’m an aussie.
Most days ;o)
June 24th, 2005 at 8:29 am
Sounds like the UK they have been doing that here for decades!
June 24th, 2005 at 9:14 am
“looks like the Nazis won WWII after all. It’s a sad day when the country that boasts about preserving freedom and democracy rules against it and takes away your basic rights …”
The allied soldiers fought and died knowing what they were fighting against. Had they known what they were fighting *for*, though, far fewer would have risked their lives.
“Yeah, but it’ll come calling itself anti-fascist.”
- Huey Long (when asked if fascism could come to America)
“The greatest evil is not done in those sordid dens of evil that Dickens loved to paint … but is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices.”
- C.S Lewis
(quotes found on puremango.co.uk)
June 24th, 2005 at 10:19 am
shoulda called a godwin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin’s_law
June 24th, 2005 at 10:21 am
heh in Canada too
June 24th, 2005 at 10:23 am
scary part of this ruling is the reinforcement of the idea that corporations are considered citizens - what’s next lobbying for the right to vote … oh wait they call that lobbying
June 24th, 2005 at 2:25 pm
I highly recommend ALL READERS to visit http://www.fija.org
It tell Americans about the most important power that they still have. Thi is the right of a juror to refuse to find someone guilty of a crime DESPITE the “evidence” and the judje’s instuctions. This power can be used to overturn unjust or unconstitutional laws. It can also be used to aquit a defendent when he or she uses arms to defend their private property rights. It can even be used to stop the conviction of FILE SWAPPERS should they wind up in criminal court.
If I were on a jury and I heard a judge suppres evidence or stop a defendent from speaking, I would use this as a real good reason to aquit the defendant. A defendent has the RIGHT to present evidence on his behalf and confront witnesses against him, If that option is denied, then aquittal is my vote. JURY NULLIFICATION is the one power we still have, USE IT!!!
June 24th, 2005 at 5:04 pm
get up ,united ,& fight those scam artist
June 24th, 2005 at 5:04 pm
get up ,united ,& fight those scam artist
June 24th, 2005 at 10:47 pm
The key phrase here is “public use”. Think roads, bridges, hydroelectric dams, and other public works projects which benefit everyone and may require large tracts of land to build. Seizing someone’s house to build condos or a mall primarily benefits fat cat private developers. Thanks to the Supreme Idiot’s decision now rich private individuals and companies can force people off their land for greed and profit.
June 25th, 2005 at 3:37 pm
no they are the customers and the politicians are the sales men… the product: their dignity and our rights.
June 27th, 2005 at 9:13 pm
I thought that this was the thing that happenned in thew old Soviet Union. Now it has come to the United States!
July 6th, 2005 at 1:09 am
This frightens me because we work our butts off to provide good homes for our families and I think this is B.S. that the government can just rip us from our homes like that. What is this country coming to?!