High court OKs personal property seizures
06-23-2005, 09:40 AM
#1
VIP Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Wherever Sucks the Most
Posts: 8,675
Car Info: 2003 WRX, 2008 Camry
High court OKs personal property seizures
http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/06/23/sc....ap/index.html
The government knows what the best use of your land is; and what is a fair price. What the **** were they thinking with this socialist crap? Does the government realize the potential can of worms they've unleashed? O'Conner got it right with the commentary at the end. Those that have the money and who like YOUR property will be able to get it and possilby at a substantially cheaper price.
We're not talking the use of eminent domain because of a major highway going in for public use. We're talking the elimination of public use via private use and part of the 5th amendment.
Eminent domain is when the government appropriates private property for public use with compensation of fair market value.
Now the government can appropriate private property for private use with compensation of fair market value. Besides the seizure of private property for private property, I believe there will be greater risk of corruption from one or more parties because of potential profits being involved.
Simply put, you will NOT get fair market value and you are now at the mercy of the those with money and ties with the government.
The government knows what the best use of your land is; and what is a fair price. What the **** were they thinking with this socialist crap? Does the government realize the potential can of worms they've unleashed? O'Conner got it right with the commentary at the end. Those that have the money and who like YOUR property will be able to get it and possilby at a substantially cheaper price.
We're not talking the use of eminent domain because of a major highway going in for public use. We're talking the elimination of public use via private use and part of the 5th amendment.
Eminent domain is when the government appropriates private property for public use with compensation of fair market value.
Now the government can appropriate private property for private use with compensation of fair market value. Besides the seizure of private property for private property, I believe there will be greater risk of corruption from one or more parties because of potential profits being involved.
Simply put, you will NOT get fair market value and you are now at the mercy of the those with money and ties with the government.
Last edited by Salty; 06-23-2005 at 09:43 AM.
06-23-2005, 01:34 PM
#5
VIP Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Wherever Sucks the Most
Posts: 8,675
Car Info: 2003 WRX, 2008 Camry
How could this happen?
Does anyone have the arguments for the ruling?
Same with the whole flag burning ordeal, what the hell is the constitution protecting us from again?
Does anyone have the arguments for the ruling?
Same with the whole flag burning ordeal, what the hell is the constitution protecting us from again?
Last edited by Salty; 06-23-2005 at 01:37 PM.
06-23-2005, 01:49 PM
#6
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: I gotta have more cow bell!!!!
Posts: 9,198
Car Info: 05 STi
Originally Posted by Salty
How could this happen?
Does anyone have the arguments for the ruling?
Same with the whole flag burning ordeal, what the hell is the constitution protecting us from again?
Does anyone have the arguments for the ruling?
Same with the whole flag burning ordeal, what the hell is the constitution protecting us from again?
Nothing because people can dilute and misconstrue what it says as whatever they feel fight. Right to bear arms......oh that just means archery weapons and water pistols.
06-23-2005, 02:02 PM
#7
VIP Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Wherever Sucks the Most
Posts: 8,675
Car Info: 2003 WRX, 2008 Camry
Right, but I find it hard to believe that our Founding Fathers had this in mind.
At least you can somewhat argue (not very well IMO but that's another thread) the validity of the 2nd amendment based on the times, you know?
There's no interpretation of this amendment in order to justify the bullying land rights. Not even through sovereignty:
Especially given the time they wrote it. We had just finished fighting bullies from accross the Atlanic Ocean,
At least you can somewhat argue (not very well IMO but that's another thread) the validity of the 2nd amendment based on the times, you know?
There's no interpretation of this amendment in order to justify the bullying land rights. Not even through sovereignty:
Originally Posted by 5th amendment
nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Last edited by Salty; 06-23-2005 at 02:12 PM.
06-24-2005, 03:49 AM
#10
Pr0n King
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land of Rocks
Posts: 26,618
Car Info: Turncoat Turbo
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3395977/
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
"A government can scarcely be deemed to be free, where the rights of property are left solely dependent upon a legislative body."
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
06-24-2005, 04:07 AM
#11
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 18,369
Car Info: 1993/2000/2001 GF4 mostly red
Originally Posted by VIBEELEVEN
We need some new s.c. justices. This is b.s. If there was a public vote on this, do you really think it would pass?
However, there is a possible redemption; states can pass laws restricting this ruling from being applied. IOW, State legislation can make it illegal for Eminient Domain to be applied to private projects. Let's hope like Hell that enough states get on this fast enough to protect us from the Federal Court. Crap, I can't believe I had to say that...
06-24-2005, 04:08 AM
#12
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 18,369
Car Info: 1993/2000/2001 GF4 mostly red
Originally Posted by Oaf
Attempt to seize my land and see what happens.
Not that you'd be wrong. I'd refuse too, even to the death. My kids would be some rich mother****ers!
06-24-2005, 06:27 AM
#13
VIP Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Detroit, Where the weak are killed and eaten...
Posts: 2,064
Car Info: 02 Impreza WRX Sedan & 2008 GMC Sierra 4x4
Originally Posted by BAN SUVS
This is the result of 5 out of 7 presidential elections being won by conservatives. The Supreme Court is the single most important piece of our government; I can't come up with an example of a majority of the high Court FUBARing a decision this badly. Conservatives can argue Roe v. Wade maybe, but even that doesn't come close to the damage to the Constitution done by this ruling.
However, there is a possible redemption; states can pass laws restricting this ruling from being applied. IOW, State legislation can make it illegal for Eminient Domain to be applied to private projects. Let's hope like Hell that enough states get on this fast enough to protect us from the Federal Court. Crap, I can't believe I had to say that...
However, there is a possible redemption; states can pass laws restricting this ruling from being applied. IOW, State legislation can make it illegal for Eminient Domain to be applied to private projects. Let's hope like Hell that enough states get on this fast enough to protect us from the Federal Court. Crap, I can't believe I had to say that...
What I don't understand is that every conservative and liberal I talk to about this ruling is really against it....How could something like this pass like it did? Does big business have the Supreme Court in their pocket or what? This is starting to get scary.
06-24-2005, 08:32 AM
#14
VIP Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Wherever Sucks the Most
Posts: 8,675
Car Info: 2003 WRX, 2008 Camry
Originally Posted by BAN SUVS
This is the result of 5 out of 7 presidential elections being won by conservatives. The Supreme Court is the single most important piece of our government; I can't come up with an example of a majority of the high Court FUBARing a decision this badly. Conservatives can argue Roe v. Wade maybe, but even that doesn't come close to the damage to the Constitution done by this ruling.
However, there is a possible redemption; states can pass laws restricting this ruling from being applied. IOW, State legislation can make it illegal for Eminient Domain to be applied to private projects. Let's hope like Hell that enough states get on this fast enough to protect us from the Federal Court. Crap, I can't believe I had to say that...
However, there is a possible redemption; states can pass laws restricting this ruling from being applied. IOW, State legislation can make it illegal for Eminient Domain to be applied to private projects. Let's hope like Hell that enough states get on this fast enough to protect us from the Federal Court. Crap, I can't believe I had to say that...
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...rprivateuseokd
Originally Posted by Article
The majority included the court's four more liberal justices. The key fifth vote was Justice Anthony Kennedy, a conservative at the court's ideological center.
Edit: Now go ahead and rephrase what you really meant to say, Kevin.
Last edited by Salty; 06-24-2005 at 08:42 AM.
06-24-2005, 10:42 AM
#15
iClub Silver Vendor
iTrader: (25)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Participating in some Anarchy!
Posts: 15,494
Car Info: 2005 LGT wagon
Case Information.
Seems to me that the State of CT, which is slightly Liberal, found a loop hole in the Constitution that allows the gov't to seize public land for nonpublic uses.
The US Sepreme Court, which is slightly Liberal, ruled in CT favor.
And yet Conservatives are to blame for this?
:sniffing the air: Looks like a Revolution is coming our way.
Seems to me that the State of CT, which is slightly Liberal, found a loop hole in the Constitution that allows the gov't to seize public land for nonpublic uses.
The US Sepreme Court, which is slightly Liberal, ruled in CT favor.
And yet Conservatives are to blame for this?
:sniffing the air: Looks like a Revolution is coming our way.