Long before the elevation of Barac Obama this case, decided in 2005, blurred the line betwee private and public use of real property and placed us in the shadow of the specter of Sociaism.

THERE GOES THE NEIGHBORHOOD

I'm thinking of asking the Township to give me my neighbor's yard. I would bulldoze the house, the garage and the swimming pool and put up a BigBox Unlimited. The public good that would flow from this exercise of Eminent Domain is huge. The township would increase its tax base and the er county would increase its tax base and the school district would increase its tax base and I, of course, could walk to the store. Oh, and I might pocket some small change.

Vas ist Eminent Domain? Zat means ve vill take your beck yard. Ve vill pay you vat ve sink is reasonable. Und you vill like it.

Don?t get me wrong. The Supreme Court's decision in the Kelo v. New London case is impeccably logical. The syllogism goes like this:

    (A) The government may take the property of private citizens for some clear, significant, positive, public use.
    (B) The commercial development of the Kelo et al property will significantly enhance the tax base of the City of New London.
    (C) New London, Connecticut upon payment of, "fair market value" may take Susette Kelo's property and hand it over to a private developer.

This is an excellent example of the fact that logic is not necessarily the truth. The second premise assumes two things, which are clearly untrue: (1) that the enhancement of the treasury is the primary effect of the transaction and (2) that this transforms the expropriation of the Kelo property into a public use.

In The News

The Camelot Times
June 15, 1215, Runnymede, England. Today His Majesty John III, Lord High Protector of the Realm affixed his seal to the Magna Charta, which, among other things protects the property of freedmen from capricious taking by the king. Large numbers of finely arrayed lords were in attendance, the Ladies Auxiliary provided refreshments and a good time was had by all, except possibly King John.		 Bill Bored Gazette
June 23, 2005, Washington D.C., USA. Today the Supreme Court of the United States of America reversed nearly eight hundred years of legal history by approving the expropriation of Susette Kelo's back yard, which it turned over to a private developer for the public good of enhancing the government treasury. The nine finely arrayed justices were in attendance and a good time was had by all except possibly the four justices who for some inexplicable reason had thought that the right to personal property had some legal standing in the Constitution.
Clippings courtesy of H.G.Wells Multi-Media and Teleportation Service.

As retiring Justice Sandra Day O?Connor states in her dissenting opinion, "To reason, as the Court does, that the incidental public benefits resulting from the subsequent ordinary use of private property render economic development takings for "public use" is to wash out any distinction between private and public use of property and thereby effectively to delete the words "for public use" from the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment."

Originally the concept of Eminent Domain was meant to protect private property from arbitrary taking by the government. The Supreme Court's action has changed it into a fast track administrative process for a massive developer's land grab.

Think of it this way. You know that guy putting up the prefabricated slum down the road from you? He's got your name on a prioritized target list to start condemnation proceedings.

It is said that if you move far enough to the left you will meet a conservative coming the other way. I suspect that King John III and Nikolai Lenin just shook hands somewhere, very deep, under New London, Connecticut.