Friday, June 24, 2005

Supreme Court Rules Cities May Seize Homes

Here is the story about the SCOTUS decision on Kelo v. New London CT.

Read the story and consider the implications. Read the decision.

The bottom line is this, if a developer wants your property for any reason he has two ways of getting it now:

1. THE OLD WAY: The developer contacts you and negotiates a purchase price. Typically if you want to sell, you will get a premium price for your property, since it is in the developer's interest to get the property with little haggling. This may get held up by you or your neighbors refusing to sell.

2. THE NEW WAY: The developer bribes your major, city manager, city council, whatever and has them use Eminent Domain to steal your property from you, paying you a below market price, and forcing you into hours of negotiations and legal fees to get a fair price, when you may not have wanted to sell in the first place. Oh, the negotiations will be on the PRICE, not the SALE. If the city "fathers" want your property, it is gone.

People say, "Well, we do that all the time". Sorry, Wrong. Eminent Domain is used to build railroad beds, roads, and public works. It also has been used to eliminate blighted areas of cities, and improve them with private investment.

Here is the deal. You own your house. The mayor wants your house. The mayor gets your house and sells it to someone else. Questions ... is it really your house now?

The tyrants in black robes have struck again. When will the American people have enough?

2 Comments:

Anonymous Mike said...

Hail Mongo!

Talk about Homeland IN-security!

The Supreme Court blew it big time on this one. When a government fails to exercise it's primary responsibility to keep its citizens secure in their own homes, it ceases to be legitmate, in my view. Certainly, it ceases to be anything our forefathers would have considered to be American.

What I'm having trouble coming to grips with though is that it was the left-leaning, not the conservative side of the court that voted this way. This is so clearly a victory for profit-taking businessmen, I would have thought the other way 'round. But evidently the rationale is that if it is good for the community (i.e., more taxes collected that we can spend on social programs) then to hell with individual rights.

*sigh* A sad day indeed for the average joe in America.

Wassail!
Mike

5:25 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I hope average Joe wakes up soon...

Mongo

7:40 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home