Added: 2 years ago
From: catoinstitutevideo
Views: 17,868
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (37)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I absolutely hate this ruling. We need a much stricter interpretation of the constitution if we think that what New London did was ok.

  • I find it interesting that CATO is against this, yet CATO is a Charles Koch venture and Koch Industries boards ALEC with Pfizer. Hypocrites. Yah, they stand for rights for PR, but not in their actions.

  • ROW vs. WADE...... u can kill a baby as long as u call it CHOICE

  • @PInk77W1 And you can imprison a man indefinitely without habeas corpus or due process as long as you call him an enemy combatant.

  • @CPORet2009 I CANT but obama can

  • the far left wants all property controleld by the government. look up agenda 21 if you want to know what the liberals will do next. connecticut and other states that allow property theft by the communists are all wastelands. Proof of the failure of communism.

  • thanks for the video, it helps me studying for my land use planning class.

  • The LURCH from the LEFT has begun to crescendo.

    Is PROPERTY the PEOPLE'S or is it GOVT's?

    Sounds like a silly question but is it really? Our GOVT complains that evil business & RICH is not spending forcing govt spend $ for them (ie stimulus). This waters down the US money supply & is essentially stealing property from US Citizens any time the GOVT wants.

    Does the GOVT serve the PEOPLE or do PEOPLE serve the GOVT? Our GOVT must not OVER-TAX, WASTE or STEAL! Once that happens = TYRANNY!

  • Aloha!

    ALL eminent domain takings must be examined rigorously. Bureaucrats and legislators cannot be trusted to make pure and objective decisions. Even traditional 'public purpose' and 'public safety' facade must be questioned and given due process in court.

    In my case in Hauula, Oahu Hawaii, the city county of Honolulu is arrogant and abusive.

    Google " HAWAII EMINENT DOMAIN ABUSE" for videos.

  • The SCOTUS is a complete disgrace.

  • You can't blame the conservatives for this one - Souter, Ginsburg, Stephens, Breyer and Kennedy voted for this. Such f-- BS - the US government is forbidden to do this:

    "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation" - 5th amendment. Poor americans, your supreme court calls black white and white black.

  • The entire Supreme Court was not Conservative in their views. Read the dissent by Justice O'Connor. Four judges did not agree with this. I agree it's a bunch of B.S.

  • This is a STATE'S RIGHTS issue - under the laws of Connecticutt, the state had the power to did what it did... Should they have done this? Assuredly not. But it was - I repeat - WAS - LEGAL. It is the job of the PEOPLE to DEMAND THEIR LEGISLATURES REVOKE/REVISE SUCH LAWS. And you know what?? Now many states have...

  • @jpsartrean How is this a states' rights issue?  The fourteenth amendment of the US Constitutiton forbids states to take "life, liberty and property without due process of the law...". Even if the law was legal, that doesn't necessarily means it's good policy.

  • Would not like to live in Conn. Just glad that most states have limits on eminent domain. In fact, a great many states have adopted the O'Connor test of harmful use (e.g., blight).

    The majority opinion was bonkers - anything could be construed as "economic development"; Berman and Midkiff could easily be distinguished from Kelo's facts.

  • "Property is surely a right of mankind as real as liberty".

    John Adams

  • This is complete B.S. Eminent domain is garbage and needs to be trashed.

  • A stark reminder of just how out of control the Supreme Court was before George W. Bush reformed it. By placing Roberts and Alito on the court, Bush was able to stem the tide of lawless activism that discredited several Supreme Court decisions.

    I thank God the DC v. Heller case was heard by the Roberts court and NOT the Rendquist court! Otherwise, the verdict might have flipped 5-4 against 2nd amendment rights for American citizens.

    -the Meat and Potatoes Blog

  • It appears we have some who are Brits.

  • And now we've got another 5-4 decision saying we can be interrogated AFTER asking ask for a lawyer. Yaaay!

  • sorry guyz!!!will find a bloody body in your closet hanging there haunting you and will kill you and ur family and if u want to stop this just sends this to 6 videos in 30 mins or this will happen good luck! good job on ur video

  • Eminent Domain should have been tossed with all of the other royalist bullshit when the constitution was being written. All of the sovereign immunity crap should have be discarded.

  • The crux of the issue is that which has absorbed more of my time on YouTube than any other topic

    "Right" or "Law" !

    Right is that which we are born with!

    Every dog and squirrel knows his rights.

    The most basic mammal function is to fight for ones basic rights!

    Law is that which State tells us we must conform to.

    Law is not based on Rights. Law is based on force, therefore Rights are inherent and Laws are imposed!

    Now pour a cup of coffee and think about that for a minute!

  • Comment removed

  • Well I drank my cup of coffee and if anyone wants to get the low-down on Kelo v. New London, read a book by Jeff Benedict called: Little Pink House. It is about GOP Govenor John Rowland, Pfizer Pharma, and how a conservative Supreme Court ruled 5/4 that anyone can pretty much take your land away from you for ANY reason! Good things came out of that ruling though! States woke up and instituted good laws regarding imminent domain. Thanks for sharing your legal philosophy.

  • This was not the ruling of a conservative Supreme Court. You should learn more about the world before you comment. Justive Stevens delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Justices Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer joined. In no stretch of the imagination are these Justices considered conservative. The dissent was delivered by the Justice O'Connor, with whom Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices Scalia and Thomas joined: the conservatives of the Court.

    This was O'Bama socialism

  • In my opinion the WHOLE Supreme Court was conservative in their opinions.

    The decision was widely criticized.[2] Many of the public viewed the outcome as a gross violation of property rights and as a misinterpretation of the Fifth Amendment, the consequence of which would be to benefit large corporations at the expense of individual homeowners and local communities.

    The land in question is as vacant as the Nevada desert! Sad!

  • I would just refer you to the opinion and to who wrote it. Because I have read the opinions and know who wrote them I am confused at your "conservative" label.

    Calling that "conservative' makes no sense to me unless you are a liberal democrat trying to turn the meanings of terms on their heads to fit a liberal "let the government fix the world" agenda. Am I mistaken?

  • And I agree with you, it is very sad that the land in question is as "vacant as the Nevada desert."

  • Sorry, I got confused on this US Supreme Court case, I was thinking about bush v. Gore. Kelo goes to show you what kind of power a Republican Governor and a powerful pharmacuetical, (Phizer), can do to a poor citizen. Imminent domain should only be used when the citizens ALL agree to give up their land. You can prove that any private land is worth more in tax dollars. One good thing is that states stepped in and wrote their own laws on imminent domain. The Kelo case was a travesty of justice!

  • Once again, knowing the case makes ALL the difference. A "Republican Governor" really has nothing to do with this. Eminent domain is the legislature's call, really. It was the legislature that signed off on this plan to take property and the bond money that was going to this project. This case was not about a private company taking land from a private citizen. This was a case about GOVERNMENT Power, and the liberals gave the Gov. all the power. Again, UNDERSTANDING is actually helpful!

  • I do know about this case. A man named Jay Levin under the direction of Republican Governor John Rowland came up with the plan to use the NLDC as the state's development agent.

  • Fuck those who are against property rights.

  • This happened right near my house.

    Nuebert Purser a decorated WWII veteran, had his 78 acre farm taken from him by force by Lee Myers the mayor of Matthews, NC. This is a violation of fundamental rights.

  • @Concreet420

    Is it true that they eventually turned the land into a landfill? This whole thing is just wrong.

  • Is it that EZ to take a house from someone today?

  • Most states have been forced to pass laws that won't allow this anymore. It's still good law and "more potential for revenue" = "public use" under the 5th amendment.

Loading...
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more