Re: Supreme court says "No more private property"

You might enjoy this:
On Monday June 27, Freestar Media, LLC informed the Towne of Weare, New Hampshire that it wants to begin the permit process to build a hotel on the land owned by Justice David H. Souter. Justice Souter's vote in the "Kelo vs. City of New London" decision allows city governments to take land from one private owner and give it to another if the government will generate greater tax revenue or other economic benefits when the land is developed by the new owner.

http://www.freestarmedia.com/hotellostliberty2.html

It would be a monumental feat if he actually accomplished it, but it would also put judges on notice that property rights aren't something to be fiddled with.

Wendy

> A recent supreme court ruling has in effect jeopardized the right
> of ownership of private property. This can affect homes and small
> businesses , even extend itself to churches and church property.

> http://www.ij.org/private_property/connecticut/6_23_05pr.html

> excerpt-----Dana Berliner, another senior attorney with the Institute for
> Justice, said, “It’s a dark day for American homeowners. While most
> constitutional decisions affect a small number of people, this decision
> undermines the rights of every American, except the most politically
> connected. Every home, small business, or church would produce more taxes
> as a shopping center or office building. And according to the Court,
> that’s a good enough reason for eminent domain.”
> ----------------

> Your home or business can be condemned in order for a
> developer to come in and replace it with something that will
> create more tax revenue for the town or city you reside in.
> This is not eminent domain as where you property will be taken
> over for use by the public good and you would be compensated
> fairly for it. This ruling makes it possible for greedy
> land developers to convince local government officials to
> condemn your property for any reason.

> Go to this news article, the link
> http://www.ij.org/private_property/norwood/6_20_05pr.html

> Excerpt from article-----
> “Justifying the use of eminent domain based on increasing taxes or
> creating jobs makes any home vulnerable to eminent domain abuse and no
> home safe from an orange X,” said Bert Gall, an attorney with the
> Institute for Justice, which is representing the Gambles for free in their
> fight to save their home. From 1998 to 2002, the Institute for Justice
> documented more than 10,000 instances of threatened or actual eminent
> domain abuse, where eminent domain was being used for private development.
> Ohio alone had more than 400 instances in that five-year period.
> ---------

> With no more private property, people will become tenants to big
> land developing corporations. Your right to own property can be
> taking away anytime the government sees a better profit revenue
> potential for its use without paying you for its real value.

> This is America. This is not Russia. But if we allow
> this go on, slowly but surely , "We the People" will become
> "We the
> Serfs."