Eminent Threat

Of all of our freedoms, the most important, the one that truly separates America from the socialist, communist, and tyrannical regimes is our private property rights. These rights are now, and have been for some time, under direct governmental attack.

Private property does not consist merely of owned land. It is your savings, your auto, your retirement fund, your pay check, yes even your blog.

Many of our property rights are now being seriously threatened. Of these, the left’s love of redistribution of wealth, I'm sure, will be the fore bearer of doom to our economy and our very way of life...if it is allowed to continue. But nothing, nothing is a more serious insult, nay abuse, of private property rights than the issue of Eminent Domain.

Eminent Domain is the government’s ability to take owned private property and use it for the ultimate public good. In itself this definition is socialist. That said, originally it had been used only as a last resort for the building of highways, schools, bridges, etc. But recently many state and local governments, through short-sighted programs, have redefined it to include what they deem blighted and/or high crime areas. And now they have moved even one more baby step down the slippery slope toward communism. The newest attack on our rights by our local and state tyrants is the practice of forcing property owners to sell, in order to give the property to businesses, merely to garner the tyrants a larger tax base.

Let me restate that...A municipality can now take your property forcefully, through the threat of fine or jail, and hand it over Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart promising, of course, the benefit of higher taxes to the municipality. That is just wrong. And unAmerican.

When the government can do this, you have NO property rights. You do not own your land, that is merely a myth. You simply rent it from the government. Who can then evict you at any time. Any time they feel they can earn more money from the next lessee.

The Supreme Court is this very moment hearing a case on this very issue. In ‘Kelo v. New London’, seven evil home owners actually think they have a right to live on their own property. The gall of these people.

The city of New London, Conn. and their attack dog lawyer Wesley W. Hortonsee it differently. In their minds these poor sots stand in the way of progress. And let their rights be damned.

This is not an issue confined to one or two jurisdictions. There are many, many Eminent Domain cases being fought throughout the country today. It is a fight we citizens must win. Other rights mean little if our right to private property is abridged. In the end, freedom of speech is just words, freedom to bear arms(to protect what?) an empty promise, freedom of assembly is meaningless; if a man can not own what he has rightly earned.

But , thankfully, we have some allies in this fight. Castle Coalition @ http://www.castlecoalition.org/ has a very informative web site, with many links to local groups that are bringing the battle to the enemy. As does the Institute for Justice found here.
The blog Eminent Domain Watch is a great place to find up to date information as well.
Unfortunately, there seems to be only one Supreme Court judge with a copy of the Constitution, and that of course is Judge Scalia. From Slate..

Justice Antonin Scalia asks what difference it makes that New London is depressed. What if a city acknowledged that it wasn't doing badly, but just wanted to condemn land to attract new industry? He describes Horton's position as: "You can always take from A and give to B, so long as B is richer." And O'Connor offers this concrete example: What if there's a Motel 6 but the city thinks a Ritz-Carlton will generate more taxes? Is that OK?

Yes, says Horton.

"So you can always take from A and give to B if B pays more taxes?" asks Scalia.

"If they are significantly more taxes," says Horton.

Truly frightening.

How did we get to this point in America? If I wasn’t so angry I think I’d just be sad.

Crossposted @ Blogger News Network