--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > --- sparaig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > snip > > > > > > > > > > > What do you think of the new Supreme Court ruling > > > > that allows local governments to buy > > > > out private landowners in order to allow some OTHER > > > > private land owner to build a > > > > business park? > > Of course, that is not what the SC ruled. It upheld 100 years of > precedent where eminent domain is used for "public purpose" -- in this > case a redevelopment project to revitalize the econonomy of the town > /area. >
the distinction being in this case that the redevelopment project is not in a blighted area, which had been part of the previous standard for eminent domain seizures. The latest ruling by the SC sets a precedent for any city to go after anyone's private property on the pretext that it is in the public interest to do so. For those in favor of this particular twist on the Constitution, I'll chip in a dime for the packing boxes for them when they get kicked out of their homes. Interestingly, when I went to www.loudobbs.com (part of CNN) to vote online on this issue, 1% had voted for it and 99% against it, roughly the same ratios of who would benefit vs suffer from such legislation. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
