The controversial Supreme Court ruling that expanded eminent domain to give government the right to take private property to allow economic development may have been all for nothing, according to a report.
Nine years after the high court sided with a Connecticut municipality in Kelo v. City of New London, a ruling Associate Justice Antonin Scalia has likened to the court's disastrous Dred Scott decision, the 90-acre plot once earmarked for office buildings, luxury apartments and a new marina, remains vacant.We commented about this back in 2005 (can't find the link, sorry) when we thought that the Fifth Amendment might possibly apply. Yes, we agreed with the minority opinion of Judge Scalia. Sure, we said at the time, "Eminent Domain" allows The State to condemn property which stands in the way of --- say --- an Interstate Freeway; but "luxury apartments"? The point was, this was not a "Depressed Area" (read: "slum"). It was a pleasant residential neighborhood, and some of the residents were second or third generation owners of the same private residence.
Seven residents who fought all the way to the Supreme Court to keep their working-class homes in the city's Fort Trumbull section have only their memories and whatever remains of the money they were forced to accept.
Today, we learn that these people were moved out of their homes for nothing. Or, in the cited case of Lead Plaintiff Suzette Kelo, they liked their homes so much that they opted to use the (inadequate) compensation paid them to move their houses to another neighborhood.
The Supreme Court (Judicial Branch) is one of the three 'legs' of the "Balance of Powers" under the U.S. Constitution. Unfortunately, it is staffed by fallible humans, as are the Legislative and Executive branches. As such they are subject making terrible decisions, which will come back to embarass them in years to come.
Today, it's the Judicial Branch wearing red faces to compliment their Black robes.
Sucks to be them, today.
No comments:
Post a Comment