Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (121723)	6/23/2005 1:15:32 PM
From: John Carragher	Respond to of 793843

seems like this helps get more conservatives on the supreme court. O"connor was joined in her opinion by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, as well as Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. From film clips i saw of the house locations it would appear the project could have been built around them.

To: LindyBill who wrote (121723)	6/23/2005 1:31:53 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793843

Taking private property for private developments -- now there's a subject fit for a Constitutional amendment. Of course, we already have two on the subject (5th and 14th) but they appear not to be clear enough for Kennedy.

To: LindyBill who wrote (121723)	6/23/2005 1:52:29 PM
From: JDN	Respond to of 793843

Oh Boy, that has got to be one of the lousiest Supreme Court rulings in history. I find it INCOMPREHENSIBLE that a DEVELOPER can get a CITY to exercise eminent domain to grab property, likely FAR BELOW its true value. I cant IMAGIN the Citizenry not opposing this in the strongest manner. If THIS isnt grounds to increase the CONSERVATIVES on the court I dont know what is. jdn