Horton, Shields & Cormier, the firm that argued before the Supreme Court on behalf of New London in Kelo v. New London, is receiving death threats, a source close the law firm informs me. What a truly absurd response.
As horrible as this decision is, there is a way to correct it that doesn't require criminal behavior or armed insurrection. The proper course of action in response to this ridiculous decision by the Supreme Court is to amend the Constitution to expressly forbid the taking of private property for other private use, no matter what better "public good" the takers may claim.
The public good intended by this decision is vastly outweighed by the detrimental effect it will have the kinds of places it is intended to help -- inner cities and depressed areas. Home ownership in a depressed area, a risky proposition by itself, has just been made riskier. This makes the Court's liberal decision a liberal bonanza by helping to keep depressed areas depressed.
For the sake of ourselves and for the sake of our cities we need to take action on this. Most of us are homeowners. Most of us who aren't homeowners plan to be. It shouldn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the numbers will be on our side when we take up the fight to push an amendment through. We need to do it and we need to start now. As a start I'm calling on any law bloggers out there who would be willing to put together the proper wording for a Constitutional Amendment that will protect us against this unreasonable expansion of the power of eminent domain. Let's get going.
How do we get an amendment through? The idea of 7-11 taking my home someday really sucks.
Posted by: Duane | July 04, 2005 at 09:22 PM
A Constitutional Amendment has to be passed by two thirds majorities in both the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives. It then has to be ratified by legislatures of three fourths of the states. I think the best way to get started would be to contact your representatives, your Congressman and both Senators. If enough people make enough noise about it something might get done.
That said, there's at least one legal type blogger who thinks the decision may not be all that bad because it leaves open a course of action in which the states legislatively protect property rights. In my quick scan of the decision I didn't find that part, which doesn't mean it's not there. So another thing you could do is contact your state representatives to tell them how unhappy you are with the Kelo decision. They will listen, especially if enough people are talking to them about it.
Posted by: Tom Bowler | July 06, 2005 at 07:03 AM
P.S. They may not do anything about it, but they will listen.
Posted by: Tom Bowler | July 06, 2005 at 07:05 AM