This “eminent domain” everyone keeps referring to does NOT exist in the United States Constitution. They refer to Amendment V.

Amendment V.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb, nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.”

There it is word for word from the Constitution and I would argue that last few lines is open to wide speculation in the true meaning it was suppose to have from the founding fathers.

Here the complete Amendment is focused on a basically a persons right when facing a court proceeding and what the government can and can not do. They can’t just put you in jail, they can’t make you talk, if you are found innocent but later information is found that they could use to convict you its to bad because of double jeopardy.

I would argue that ”nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law” means if part of your punishment in court may involve the taking of your life, liberty or the taking of your property there must be a due process.

Then, the last few lines make a statement that IF and WHEN the government takes your land they must justly compensate you for it. Does that mean if they take it from you in court due to a case your being tried for the government must compensate you?

Just doesn’t seem to make sense to add a line at the end of an amendment that is completely out of context with the other 8 – 12 lines.

Would be like having the first amendment (freedom of speech) and then adding one line at the end that makes a statement in some regards that the government can tax you anytime you use a public restroom…

 

It's a shame that the crooked politicians are allowed day after day to cont.
in their crooked little ways. Of course you don't see any of the crooked pols
having their houses taken. Nope their houses are just fine BUT Mr. and Mrs.
hard working for what they have can be ripped off, and that of course is OK
by them, and oh by the way don't forget too vote for them next election too.

 

"To: The Editor,

Yesterday the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) passed down a decision that was possibly the most powerful hammer blow against individual liberty the citizens of this nation have ever felt. By handing down a split 5-4 decision that an individual citizen can be forced to sell their property for what was described in the opinion as "public use" the court has in effect stripped everyone in this country of the right to own property.

The new definition of "public use" appears to be any development that will broaden the government’s tax base. The development in question in this case was not in any way a public institution or infrastructure. It is a purely capitalistic venture that will allow the local government to obtain a higher tax payoff than they are currently receiving from the residents.

The residents of New London did not want to move. Many of these residents are elderly people who have lived in their homes their entire lives. Yet, because the local government craved more funding, these unfortunate folks, that had previously assumed they had property rights learned that in fact, they have no rights at all.

What does this ruling mean to us as citizens of Walton County? That is a very good question and is the true reason for my letter. I would like to know just where we stand. This sort of thing cannot happen, no developer can rip away our property, without the assistance of our county commission. The commission must exhibit a true lack of moral judgment and willingness to broaden the tax base at all costs for this outrageous practice of exercising "eminent domain" to occur in our county.

It is my desire that you publish this letter as a request to our elected officials as an inquiry to their opinions of the ruling that was handed down by SCOTUS yesterday and that the Tribune publish each and every answer in order for the citizens of Walton to assess our current level of liberty.

I thank you in advance for your efforts in this matter,

Sincerely,"

No, I didn't write it but it needs to be seen.

Dan

 

Come n'git my property.

I'll be waitin' fer ya with rifle in hand.

 

They tried to some thing like this in Lincoln,Ne. Some Billionare wanted to build a Huge Hotel next to an event center, But he said he would only do it if he could get a certain location. The city then declared that entire area "a blited neighborhood". the property was devalued by about 40% Two months later the owners got a notice in the mail Notifying them that their property may be seized for Eminent Domain and that they should go to the City council if they would like to have any input before the Council made its decision.. They all went to the next City Council meeting to complain.

One of these guys showed up with a bunch a Hotel Supplies and a thank you note from some supplier?. It had his address, but It had the name of the hotel on it?



These people got totally hosed. Fortunantly, Every one at the meeting exploded in rage at the council. The average meeting lasts 45 minutes, this one went on for 8 hours. Needless to say, They Sent the Billionare packing.

But now that the Supreme Court has just butt-****ed every property owner in America, I dont honestly see any way too stop it the next time some shmuck tries to steal some ones property.

Corporations used to try and build in areas that would cause the least amount of disruption to property owners. Hell, now its not even a concern?

I wonder how the justices will feel If Walmart bulldozes their homes to make a Super Center????

Not that rich people have to worry about that sort of thing......
I've never heard of $250,000 homes getting knocked down for imminent Domain???
Fugrs

 

The gummint thinks they can knock down the American dream just 'cause someone else is "more important" than the guy who was there first?

I don't think so.

I don't even own a house or property yet, and this both pisses me off and scares the hell outta me.

Pony Driver said it:

 

Sounds good! But why don't we go after the Supreme Court Judge's home?

http://www.freenation.tv/hotellostliberty2.html