I was troubled by the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in June that the government could use eminent domain powers to acquire private property for an economic development purpose. But I was sympathetic to the court’s concern that justices in Washington, D.C., aren’t in the best position to decide whether a local project serves a public purpose. So I’m uneasy that the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing Tuesday to consider ways to limit eminent domain, such as by withholding federal money from local governments. A better approach — which the Supreme Court mentioned — is for state legislatures to establish restrictions on the use of eminent domain, an issue the Kansas Legislature is planning to address next session.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- DavidB on Health care reform would save state money
- DavidB on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
- American_Way on Open thread 11/22
- American_Way on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
34 Comments
The use of eminent domain powers for private profit is the same as armed robbery. There is just no other way to see it.
Yes, but it fits in with the city/county’s master plan to get more property and get it off the tax rolls, so taxes can be raised on the remaining property owners.
JUSTA GUY,I hardly think that’s the answer. In fact emminent domain has been used recently to widen the tax base, taking homes, which don’t usually pay as much as businesses, and building retail stores, car lots, condominiums, etc., which take in more taxes for the city.The point is that emminent domain was written into the constitution for reasons other than what it is used for today. The Supreme Courts decision sucked big time. They blew it.
We will see if the States are reluctant to give up this new power.
We will see if eminent domain will be used to give land to Wal-Mart on Kellogg and Oliver.
The use of Eminent Domain is absolutely restricted by the Constitution for public use only {in the sixth amendment}.
We need Justices on the Supreme Court who have mastered the art of reading.
Between Bush and the Supreme Court, the Constitution is being shredded. Each should suffer the consequences of Treason { also covered by the Constitution}.
This isn’t Israel, where laws mean nothing and stealing is paramount, this is America, and we need to do things the American way.
The old saying still applies: “If you lie down with dogs, then you wake-up with fleas.”
Just on the face of it, recient Eminent Domain decisions leave a bad taste. People getting kicked out of their homes for the benefit of commercial development? That Sucks!!!! Much as I don’t like it, I can see some sense in taking property for the public good; highways etc. But not for commercial development. It’s scary to think our city council has that kind of power considering their recient history (Turning over parkland to DEN, etc). We need some limits on Eminent Domain.
The fact that the government can just acquire someone’s property from them for the purpose of handing the land over to a business is just wrong. That ruling needs to be overturned.
Wal-Mart does have the right to ask people in the Kellogg/Oliver area to sell their properties, but the government should not be able to force them to sell.
Supreme Court issues aside, this is a good example of why people need to pay more attention to local elections. Just who is this person you are voting for to be a county commisioner or city councilman?
I wonder what other constitutional rights or limitations Phillip Brownlee would advocate having the government regulate.
I have an insight for you Phillip, the local government was the entity trying to seize the land. Do you really expect them to suddenly limit their own power to do so?
The Supreme Court effectively nullified part of the 5th amendment. Maybe next time they decide the parts about double jeopardy and a grand jury are also to be ignored.
Correction: I said 6th but it should be:
Amendment IVThe right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment VNo person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
“public use” are the operative words. Anybody see “private use?”
Also: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,”
That stupid Bush and his “buddies” need to be gone, along with their manufactured excuse “terrorism.”
Ed what on earth does this have to do with Bush? What does this have to do with terrorism? Why so much hate?
Because, Heck, a lot of the PATRIOT act flies in the face of the bill of rights, just like this SCOTUS ruling does . . .
Agreed, NoJo.
Why don’t you think Bill O’Really comments on this?
Hmmm . . .
Heckler, Do you walk around in the daze? What are you doing on as politcal blog? Learn something, then come back and you’ll be able to understand.
When you allow filthy jews to sit on the bench you should excpect evil such as the Kelo ruling to occur.
Ian, you sound just like CF and Galahad. Birds of a feather, absolutely.
Puny–
Hold still, this alumnium softball bat won’t hurt a bit when I whack you with it.
DOINK!
Lights out, loser . . .
Galahad, you’re assuming the gutless bitch would face you.
Ed? Last I check, it was the LIBERAL members of the court who voted for the new eminent domain power.
The Conservative members and Justic O’Conner were ademently opposed to it.
Ed
What does eminent domain have to do with the patriot act, what does this decision have to do with Bush?
The topic was eminent domain, make sure you’re taking the right dosage of whatever it is that you are on.
Here’s a good question. When eminent domain is used, why is the price given usually lower than the tax assessed value by the city/county?
As for retail properties paying more in taxes than private properties
Heck, Your “shock treatments” aren’t working. Try something different. Learn something.
Joe, A bad idea is a bad idea. It doesn’t matter where it comes from, it’s still a bad idea. I believe that O’Conner voted “for” it.
Joe, A bad idea is a bad idea. It doesn’t matter where it comes from, it’s still a bad idea. I believe that O’Conner voted “for” it.
EdMy shock treatments are working just fine, thank you very much. As a matter of fact I’ve been trying to get them to up the voltage. I’ve found that I like the smell of my nose hairs smoldering when they get the voltage just right. The colors I see for about 10 seconds afterwards are pretty awsome as well.
Jimmy and Ray baby, My keyboard is already on fire and that’s what smoked you Zionists out into the open. Answer this pigs: Why, in all polls, is Israel considered: “Israel is the greatest threat to world peace?”
Should the rest of the world burn their keyboards as well?
Wrong Ed.
O’Conner was a against it and wrote the dissent.
I’ll give you the link to her dissenting opinion.
http://straylight.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/04-108.ZD.html
Joe, Thanks, you are right. Nobody has a monopoly on bad ideas.
Jimmy and Ray baby.
Ha’aretz: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/627751.html
“This is a study that sits comfortably. There are others whose results aren’t so optimistic, like the extensive research conducted a few months ago by Dr. Frank Luntz from the Israel Project. He found worrying phenomena when he ran focus groups of students at respected institutions. Almost all the students interviewed said they had become distanced from the Israeli position and moved closer to the Palestinian one in the last few years. Luntz concluded that unless there is quick and decisive action among the generation of future leaders, one can expect less flattering Harris Polls to come. Some consider his research “historic,” while others see it as a reason to invest in pro-Israel public relations, even though the situation appears to be stable.”
“pro-Israel public relations” is what is commonly known as “Israeli propaganda”
Ed! I know we can get along. ;)
I don’t really care who voted for it. I think it’s wrong and our crooked-ass representatives need to get off their butts and DO something about it. The idea that somebody with more money can take your property away with government help stinks! Who in their right mind thinks that’s fair?
A suggestion.Instead of paying the people fair market value for their families land that is being taken from them.Why not pay them based on the future property values?It’s not right to give their land to a developer who will make huge profits while only paying them little.
XXX, Dead-on. Bravo!