Property rights aren’t what they used to be.

The Supreme Court has recently given possibly the most damaging ruling in the past 20 years. The ruling expands Eminent Domain to include government seizing of private property for the purpose of private development. Eminent Domain used to be invoked only to expand roads, put in schools, parks, or other such government buildings and utilities. This ruling is the result of the suit Kelo vs. The City of New London. City officials in New London are hoping to revitalize their city by declaring the homes of some residents condemned and then leasing the property to a private developer to create a riverfront hotel, a health club, office buildings, a river walk along the Thames River, a Coast Guard museum and a research center for Pfizer Corporation. This ruling allows the powerful or rich to persuade local officials to steal the property of common, less powerful people.

The Supreme Court came down with a 5-4 decision against the property owners of America. It wasn’t conservative justices in favor of this decision either, as some would automatically assume. I’m starting to believe that liberals in this country want some form of modified socialism melded with capitalism. Basically, enterprise and profit are allowed, although heavily regulated, but property is owned by the government, not the individual. This attack on property rights goes hand-in-hand with Madison’s smoking ban in bars, which strips business owners of the right to choose if they will allow an otherwise legal activity on their property.

The government is failing the people. It’s supposed to protect the rights of everyone, not just the rich and powerful. It’s time for a Constitutional Amendment to protect rights of property owners.

I suggest everyone gets involved with protecting property rights. Read more about this issue at Ann Althouse’s blog and Michelle Malkin’s blog here and here.

UPDATE: Friday, 24 June 2005, 13:19

Let’s look at the Fifth Amendment:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

The Supreme Court ruling on Kelo vs. The City of New London of course redefined “public use” to include the leasing of seized land for private use. The Supreme Court has fundamentally altered the Constitution by weakening the Bill of Rights. It’s time for Congress and the President to step in and exercise the power of checks and balances and amend the Constitution to protect property owners. While they’re at it, they should end the lifelong appointment of Judges. At the very least, appointment to the Supreme Court should include a Sunset Clause. After 12 years on the bench, approval of another 12 year term should be determined by a simple majority vote by Congress.

UPDATE: Fri, 24 June 2005, 14:07

The Truth Laid Bear has created an aggregator and community for blogs discussing Kelo vs. The City of New London ruling. There’s a lot of information to be found there. Give it a read. The blogosphere is really getting on top of this issue.