Ammo For Sale

« « Debate wrap up | Home | And the assault weapons ban didn’t stop him » »

Eminent Domain Mini Round up

On the pending SCOTUS case:

Whether local governments are appropriately taking privately owned property for economic development projects is at issue in a case accepted for review by the justices of the nation’s top court. The case will mark the first time the Supreme Court has issued a ruling on eminent domain law in 20 years.

The case specifically challenges plans by a Connecticut town to condemn privately owned property so a private developer can build a hotel, a conference center, office buildings, housing and parking.

Taken state by state, court rulings have produced a patchwork quilt of case law addressing eminent domain. Seven states allow condemnations for private development alone. Eight forbid the use of eminent domain when the purpose is not to eliminate blight. Three states are ambiguous. And 32, including North Carolina, have not addressed the issue.

I’m rather surprised that many states forbid the use of eminent domain except in cases of blight. I’d like to see more of that. Of course, I’m sure the blight designation has been abused as well. This article mentions a couple’s dealings with eminent domain. The author provides an interesting snippet:

But over a span of about 50 years, the courts have inexorably changed the generally accepted justification of “public use” into a broader concept of “public benefit,” a critical distinction that opened the way for local governments in fiscal crisis to condemn whole neighborhoods as “blighted” and turn them over to private, profit-seeking developers and corporations. The rationale is contained in a kind of trickle-down corollary that presumes the public would benefit from the jobs and tax revenue generated by the redevelopment. That was the thinking behind the gigantic IKEA project in New Rochelle’s City Park.

By any definition, eminent domain for private benefit is corporate welfare. And it continues to spread at an alarming rate across the land, here and in most states.

According to the Institute for Justice, a Washington-based group that has waged numerous legal battles against this abusive form of eminent domain, 1,000 properties were targeted for condemnation between 1998 and 2002, but those stark numbers hardly tell the story of the individual lives that are disrupted or ruined by the heavy-handed process.

Often times, even if you win the legal battle, the costs are still significantly high.

Comments are closed.

Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.

Uncle Pays the Bills

Find Local
Gun Shops & Shooting Ranges


bisonAd

Categories

Archives