Including your right to free speech?
Most municipalites, even those who were pushing the envelope on this, knew that the constitutional concept of private property loomed over them. Until now. Now there are no restraints to abuse except local ones.
Before Kelo most people of modest means were protected in their property
because of the threat of the violation of a constitutional right.
Now corrupt local governments (that is to say, all of them)
and the people who bribe them know that the poor and modest can't fight the case and appeals. It matters not a wit that it is harder to proceed in federal courts than local courts, the poor have no means to do either.
I guess, Gene, my question remains. I imagining that you, like me and most people here, are keen on property rights ... why would you feel better or more secure now that the threat that attaching your property though eminent domain might run afoul of your constitutional guarantee of same has been effectively removed?
And why would you want the federal protection for your rights to your property turned over to local determination but not your other rights.
Why do the arguments you have furthered to abdicate the enforcement of one right to the locals not apply to your other guaranteed rights as well?
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.