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: Ilaine who wrote (121920)	6/24/2005 9:37:31 AM
From: JDN	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 793884

Our Local paper, the Ft. Lauderdale Sun Sentinel is carrying the SC decision on the front page. Much concern. Several stories, including one I remember about a man who owns some storefronts on the waterfront. A developer wants the property and THREATENED the property owner with this: EITHER SELL IT TO ME OR I'LL HAVE THE CITY CONDEMN THE PROPERTY FOR EMINENT DOMAIN and then get it even cheaper. So, you can see how this law is going to be ABUSED. jdn

To: Ilaine who wrote (121920)	6/24/2005 9:39:27 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793884

But it does stand for deference to a state's own determination of what constitutes a public use. Something of a silver lining, perhaps. I think these last cases illustrate how difficult it would be to repopulate the court more to the liking of the right. There are elements that are in conflict with each other and you can have conservative justices prioritizing different elements over others and ending up on opposite sides. The lefties are more predictable.