Waller objects to eminent domain ruling

Include Sedgwick County District Judge Gregory Waller among those who object to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling last summer allowing the use of eminent domain for private developments. “I think it’s a terrible decision,” Waller said at an NAACP dinner in Hutchinson last weekend, according to The Hutchinson News. “You can be sitting fat and happy in your house, and if someone wants it for a shopping center, they can go to the Huchinson city council and use eminent domain to have you moved — and the Supreme Court says that’s OK.”
Waller, who received international attention for presiding over the BTK case, was also outspoken in responding to a question about the possibility of his one day serving on the Kansas Supreme Court. He said that minorities face an uphill battle making the high court, because the nominating committee restricts the governor’s choices.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee

6 Comments

  1. R.D.Liebst
    Posted October 7, 2005 at 2:53 am | Permalink

    You know I always like him, even when he was an assitant D.A. He reminds me of Judge Watson.

  2. Joe Williams
    Posted October 7, 2005 at 6:16 am | Permalink

    I have met him personally, not in court of course. ;)

    I met him at WSU and he gave a lecture in a class and was talking about local politics and being a judge. He was pretty cool guy and very intelligent. This was about 5 years ago when I met him.

  3. janabanana
    Posted October 7, 2005 at 9:04 am | Permalink

    His career won’t go far…he has too much common sense!It sounds like he doesn’t have much tolerance for political games.If only we had wise politicians.

  4. TRACY
    Posted October 7, 2005 at 11:39 am | Permalink

    There’s a grassroots movement started on the web to buy the supreme court justice’s homes and erect “liberty hotels” on the spot.I love it!And it should be done, by their own rules.Level their homes and create so many crappy service worker jobs.DAMNED AMERICAN PER THEIR OWN RULING!

  5. NoJoCo
    Posted October 7, 2005 at 12:06 pm | Permalink

    I’m really impressed with Waller. He did a great job with the Dennis Rader case and he said the correct thing about eminent domain for private developments.

  6. Jed
    Posted October 7, 2005 at 7:03 pm | Permalink

    When I read that decision, I understood the court to say that restrictions on Eminent Domain were up to the various states, and that the Constitution itself doesn’t impose limits on it. That doesn’t say that unlimited seizures of property is right, it just lays the onus on the states. So rather than bitching about the decision, wouldn’t it be more productive to force the issue in the legislature while public opinion is strong about it?