The first of what I assume will be many bills passed the House:
Recently, the House voted to use the spending power of Congress to reign in a Supreme Court ruling in Kelo v. City of New London which strips the property rights of private citizens by granting the government power to seize private homes and transfer it to a private developer.
The House measure, which passed 231-189, denies federal money to any city or state project that used eminent domain to force people to sell their property to make way for more profitable private projects.
“The threat to freedom from the Kelo decision is very real. If a hostile government decides a shopping mall would produce a more profitable tax base than your family home or the family business then the government could grab that land for use by a private developer,” says Tony Perkins, President of Family Research Council.
Should be interesting to follow.
Is this another expansion of the amazingly elastic Commerce Clause, or is there some other rationale for federal intervention in local government issues?
Proponents of limited government should be against this action of the federal government just as they are against the Kelo decision. The proper remedy is for voters to vote out the individuals in their state government that passed legislation allowing this sort of thing as an economic development tool and vote out the individuals in their local government that approved this specific project. The Feds need not get involved.
Doug’s right. This is bullshit on top of bullshit. In theory I’d say this is good, because I disagree with the decision, but in actual effect, it does nothing in the case of New London (so far as I know), and will likely have little impact on any other project as well.
Pure posturing by jackasses in Washington.
COMMERCE CLAUSE ELASTICITY VS. EMINENT DOMAIN OVERREACH: FIGHT!
Eep! Makes me feel like a citizen of Tokyo when Godzilla was fighting King Kong.
The problem with a “throw the bastards out” response is twofold: it wouldn’t do jack against someone who’s already planning to retire, and it overlooks the fact that in some cases, the general public might be in favor of a seizure which is nonetheless still morally wrong.
I’m 100% OK with the federal government addressing this matter.
And that’s exactly how the federal government expands. There is always some bad state or local government action that shouldn’t be happening. In come the feds. But, once in, they never leave.
If a slight expansion of the federal government kept my local govenrment from stealing my house or place of business, I’d be 100% OK with that, too.
Lets order the removal of al five of the judges who voted in favor of the entimate domain we can do without these imperial judges
Does the law make a distinction between homeowners and commercial property owners? If not, guess who’s going to benefit more.