Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Reason interviews the lawyer who represented Kelo

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Justin, Jun 24, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Justin

    Justin Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    19,285
    Location:
    THE CHAIR IS AGAINST THE WALL
    Never Mind the Kelo, Here's Scott Bullock

    The attorney who argued the landmark eminent domain case surveys the blight
    in the wake of the Supreme Court's decision. A Reason interview.

    Tim Cavanaugh


    Scott Bullock, senior attorney at the Institute for Justice, represented the plaintiffs before the U.S. Supreme Court in the landmark eminent domain case Kelo vs. City of New London. He spoke with Reason in the wake of yesterday's decision in favor of the city.

    Rest of article here .
     
  2. Ben Shepherd

    Ben Shepherd Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2004
    Messages:
    4,755
    Location:
    Utah
    Thanks Justin. Good read.

    I am afraid this one will cost lives before it's through!!! :( :banghead: :cuss:
     
  3. Brett Bellmore

    Brett Bellmore Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    979
    Location:
    Capac, Michigan
    I'm afraid it won't.
     
  4. rock jock

    rock jock Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    3,008
    Location:
    In the moment
    Let's gain some perspective (which sadly, is often missing on THR). This rulling was plain stupid, BUT, we are NOT going to see a surge of property seizures as a result. Elected officials will be reluctant to to this for fear of raising the ire of their constituents.

    The sheer number of ordinary citizens that are outraged by this ruling will ensure that this issue is going to be front and center in any private development.
     
  5. pax

    pax Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    9,762
    Location:
    Washington state
    +1 to both Ben & Brett.

    pax
     
  6. TrybalRage

    TrybalRage Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2005
    Messages:
    317
    Location:
    Marietta, GA
    Not any that you'll hear about anyway.

    One local guy, who will lose.

    Happens all the time.
     
  7. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    That hasn't slowed them down an awful lot in the past, and now they have the Supreme Court on their side.

    In America? The founding fathers would rebel.
     
  8. bjbarron

    bjbarron Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2004
    Messages:
    322
    Location:
    Jersey - *gag*
    Standing Wolf has it right. Think about it...who is generally in the pockets of the big developers? Certainly not the fedGov as a rule...it's always the local pols. Their constituents want lower taxes...what do they care if a dozen oldsters get booted.

    Think about who owns these properties...older people, long term residents in small houses, older 'un-PC' businesses like brake shops and storage sheds. The little guy. It has been happening for years and the ruling yesterday only made it easier.

    Oh, by the bye, check your tax ratable and see what they would pay you for your house...certainly not market. My 'just compensation' would be 1/3 the market value of my home. I live in the largest home on the largest piece of property in a 95 year-old development generally made up of small summer bungalow type homes...on the Barnegat Bay. The property across the street was already bought by the multi-million dollar yacht club across the inlet from my house for the purpose of building 5 more docks on my side. I paid $28K for my house over 30 years ago and you don't what to know what my property is worth now. Unless ED grabs it for what my tax ratable is.

    Tragedy, even greater than someone losing his or her home, will result from this.

    Personally, I always wondered if I would go out with blood in my mouth defending the 2nd amendment. Now I wonder about the 5th.
     
  9. Coltdriver

    Coltdriver Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    2,202
    Location:
    Colorado
    Jock Rock,

    The truth is that there are many, perhaps hundreds of land grabs that were in the wings waiting to see what the outcome of this review would be.

    Now, particularly in states where the constition of the state allows it, those land grabbers will proceed full steam ahead with nothing to impede them.

    Those who may have hesitated in the past will now proceed with gusto.

    Will it happen in every state, overnight?? No.

    Will it happen with greater frequency now that the SC has given the green light? Absolutely.

    Government is supposed to be limited. This ruling strikes at the heart of freedom which is all about property and the right to do with it as you wish.

    This is a long way from over, but it will get worse before it gets better.
     
  10. Art Eatman

    Art Eatman Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    43,754
    Location:
    Terlingua, TX; Thomasville,GA
    http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1089315053237

    Excerpt:

    "More than 10,000 properties nationwide were taken or threatened by eminent domain between 1998 and 2002, according to the Institute for Justice, a Washington-based libertarian public interest law firm. Currently, eminent domain lawsuits are pending in at least a dozen states, including Michigan, New Jersey, Ohio, Connecticut, New York and Florida.

    Condemnation lawyers assert that these lawsuits are part of a growing phenomenon in which municipalities seize property from homeowners and small businesses, then deliver it to larger companies that can produce huge tax revenues."

    This was the first link of many, in a quick Google search of eminent domain lawsuits.

    FWIW, Art
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page