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 : Bush Administration's Media Manipulation--MediaGate? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Proud_Infidel who wrote (4459)	7/29/2005 9:06:18 AM
From: Rock_nj	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9838

The way the SC justified it was by saying that increased tax revenues generated by the development benefit the "common good". That's a big stretch. They've been developing my town for years and it hasn't stopped my property taxes from soaring. The easiest way for this horrible decision to be overturned would be for Congress to pass a law and the President to sign it that defines eminent domain in narrow terms only covering public works and banning giving seized land to private interests. That law would surely spark a court battle, but it might prevent eminent domain abuse for a number of years until it is decided and perhaps a new court with a different set of circumstances would decide differently and uphold the orginal definition of eminent domain.