Down with Property Rights
I’ve been away, but heard this story on the radio. It’s incredible.
A city can take a person’s home or business for a development project designed to revitalize a depressed local economy, a divided U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Thursday in a decision that could have nationwide impact.
By a 5-4 vote, the high court upheld as constitutional the taking by New London, Connecticut, of 15 properties belonging to nine residents or investment owners for a project to complement a nearby research facility by the Pfizer Inc. drug company.
Justice John Paul Stevens said for the court majority that the project served a “public purpose” and that the court should not second-guess the city’s judgments about the plan.
The residents opposed the plans to raze their homes and businesses to clear the way for a riverfront hotel, health club and offices. They argued that it amounted to an unconstitutional taking of their property, located on a peninsula that juts into the Thames River.
Reuters: Property can be taken for development-Supreme Court
The concept of “eminent domain” has been used in the past for things like highways, where the project fills a valid public need. Now, anything that increases jobs or tax revenue can be considered a “public purpose.”
If you own a home, and a big company wants to build on your land, a local government has the power to make that happen.
Churches, synagogues, mosques, temples, not-for-profit organizations should be very worried. Such establishments contribute little tax revenue. Pretty much anything else built there would be of a beneficial “public purpose.”
Simply put, this decision is bullshit.
