Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Perd Hapley on June 13, 2011, 01:55:18 AM
-
No one seems to remember that eminent domain is allowed for in our Bill of Rights. This sometimes perplexes and amuses me. I've GOT to start lowering my expectations.
-
While eminent domain is in the COTUs it is far too often abused. IMO the Kelo decision was an abomination. Taking private property to "improve the tax base" just doesn't cut it in my book.
When is it used for required infrastructure improvements it is a necessary evil. Too often the "victim" of eminent domain gets shafted.
-
While eminent domain is in the COTUs it is far too often abused. IMO the Kelo decision was an abomination. Taking private property to "improve the tax base" just doesn't cut it in my book.
When is it used for required infrastructure improvements it is a necessary evil. Too often the "victim" of eminent domain gets shafted.
^^^This^^^
For actual needed use, it's one thing. To put up a condo? Not so much.
-
The original intent was for eminent domain to be used for legitimate public purposes - perhaps a road, maybe a bridge, or even a frontier fort. You can logically extend that today to a public school or municipal airport.
There is no way logic permits it to be extended into an abomination like Kelo, any more than the interstate commerce clause was warped out of recognition in Wickard v. Filburn.
-
No one seems to remember that eminent domain is allowed for in our Bill of Rights. This sometimes perplexes and amuses me. I've GOT to start lowering my expectations.
Just because something is Constitutional doesn't mean we SHOULD do it, even if we CAN do it.
-
It seems most people believe that eminent domain was invented by Kelo.
-
It seems most people believe that eminent domain was invented by Kelo.
No, most people have no idea what Kelo is.
Of those who are paying attention and know what Kelo is, most will also know that eminent domain has a very limited, but necessary purpose. Kind of like the interstate commerce clause. That it has become abused is not a reflection on the intended purpose.
-
Of those who are paying attention and know what Kelo is, most will also know that eminent domain has a very limited, but necessary purpose.
Not true.
-
Not true.
Ok, then. Can I get an example of this phenomenon? My experience doesn't match what you are claiming.
-
It seems most people believe that eminent domain was invented by Kelo.
As Makattak pointed out, some of us know what Kelo did to us and the hideous abomination it wrought on the COTUS .
Just because it is legal don't make it right or just.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain)
-
fistful makes a cogent point.
Another is proclaiming that <some gov't action>, which violates one's personal libertarian or anarchic beliefs, to be "unconstitutional."
This occurs all to often in cases where the issue is actually federalism at work.
Some folks think that some ideology that has been thoroughly tested in dorm rooms and classrooms throughout the land is a viable replacement for the combined and distilled wisdom of the West, from the ancients through the Founders.
-
Just to be a nitpicker on detail, but the Constitutions doesn't technically "allow" eminent domain. It doesn't disallow it, but adds the limitation that the owner must be compensated. Perhaps also it uses the term "public use".
I thought what Kelo did was basically say the Constitution and Feds don't specify what is allowed for eminent domain. Why is that a problem?
-
Ok, then. Can I get an example of this phenomenon? My experience doesn't match what you are claiming.
I don't have any links for you. My examples are all from people I talk to, and from listening to talk radio. I'm glad your friends are better informed than mine. Maybe that's why I spend more time talking politics here, than locally.
-
Well, the thing about eminent domain is it all rests on how...eminent you are, doesn't it? =D
-
Well, the thing about eminent domain is it all rests on how...eminent you are, doesn't it? =D
:facepalm:
-
Careful, you'll need that head one of these days. =D
-
where kelo freaked me out was i could always see that in the case of a road coming through or being widened i could understand eminent domain. to do some type of development? not so much. then i also remember finding out why the beltway in dc has the "roller coaster" in montgomery county as oppossed to the more usual interstate going through prince georges county
-
Careful, you'll need that head one of these days. =D
It's a stuntman. Don't worry. :laugh: