[Speed Gibson,
Sunday June 26, 2005 at 11:53pm]
The Kelo Decision
I'm disappointed by the U.S. Supreme Court's Kelo decision upholding the local government's use of eminent domain. But it's not the end of the world. It might even be correct.
From a Federalist point of view, wouldn't this be a State matter? Yes, we have the Civil War amendments that supposedly extend and impose the Federal Bill of Rights throughout the states. But really, isn't a Federal government that simply accepts your state's definition of boundaries, covenants, easements, liens, mineral rights, etc the ideal? Do we want any branch of the Federal Goverment deciding what a "public purpose" truly is?
"... the Law is an ass -- an idiot." said Mr. Bumble in Charles Dickens' Oliver Twist. Many laws can be abused, such as the general power to tax. Attempts have been made in the past to prohibitively tax guns, even ammunition out of existence to circumvent the Second Amendment. On its face, it's perfectly legal.
Even if SCOTUS had ruled otherwise, similar ways could have been found to achieve the same result. Even zoning is a hidden form of this, where despite grandfathering of the old classification, should your house burn down you may not be able to rebuild it if it is now zoned non-residential.
What ultimately matters most is the integrity and judgement of those we elect and give such powers. Where these are lacking, either don't move there or insist on a healthy discount as insurance against later seizure.
From a Federalist point of view, wouldn't this be a State matter? Yes, we have the Civil War amendments that supposedly extend and impose the Federal Bill of Rights throughout the states. But really, isn't a Federal government that simply accepts your state's definition of boundaries, covenants, easements, liens, mineral rights, etc the ideal? Do we want any branch of the Federal Goverment deciding what a "public purpose" truly is?
"... the Law is an ass -- an idiot." said Mr. Bumble in Charles Dickens' Oliver Twist. Many laws can be abused, such as the general power to tax. Attempts have been made in the past to prohibitively tax guns, even ammunition out of existence to circumvent the Second Amendment. On its face, it's perfectly legal.
Even if SCOTUS had ruled otherwise, similar ways could have been found to achieve the same result. Even zoning is a hidden form of this, where despite grandfathering of the old classification, should your house burn down you may not be able to rebuild it if it is now zoned non-residential.
What ultimately matters most is the integrity and judgement of those we elect and give such powers. Where these are lacking, either don't move there or insist on a healthy discount as insurance against later seizure.