|
|
| User: "RHertz" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Let's raze Dave Souter's house for a hotel! |
29 Jun 2005 10:00:21 AM |
|
|
"Lt. Kizhe Catson" <lt.kizhe@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:42C2ACAB.5060803@gmail.com...
magilla wrote:
http://www.freestarmedia.com/hotellostliberty2.html
Sweeeeeeet.
I'll send a few bucks to invest in that.
I read the story on the original ruling on a news site. Interesting
that the dissenting justices were (Scalia and Rhenquist IIRC) were
people I usually disagree with on other topics. But not this time: I
can't imagine a more blatant carte blanche for large corporations to
trample all over the little guy.
Fortunately, I live in a jurisdiction where SCotUS' writ does not run.
Yet.
-- Kizhe
Interestingly, the majority in this case included the court's liberals and
moderates: Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer, and the courts
conservatives, O'Connor, Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas, voted against it.
O'Connor and Thomas wrote scathing dissents, stating that the court had
opened a can of worms which could cause all sorts of abuse.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=04-108
"Lost Liberty Hotel" with the "Just Desserts Cafe". I look forward to its
opening! But they've got to get that bum living on the property off!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob Casanova" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Let's raze Dave Souter's house for a hotel! |
29 Jun 2005 04:04:17 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 11:00:21 -0400, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by "RHertz"
<rhertz314@spamlesscox.net>:
"Lt. Kizhe Catson" <lt.kizhe@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:42C2ACAB.5060803@gmail.com...
magilla wrote:
http://www.freestarmedia.com/hotellostliberty2.html
Sweeeeeeet.
I'll send a few bucks to invest in that.
I read the story on the original ruling on a news site. Interesting
that the dissenting justices were (Scalia and Rhenquist IIRC) were
people I usually disagree with on other topics. But not this time: I
can't imagine a more blatant carte blanche for large corporations to
trample all over the little guy.
Fortunately, I live in a jurisdiction where SCotUS' writ does not run.
Yet.
-- Kizhe
Interestingly, the majority in this case included the court's liberals and
moderates: Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer, and the courts
conservatives, O'Connor, Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas, voted against it.
O'Connor and Thomas wrote scathing dissents, stating that the court had
opened a can of worms which could cause all sorts of abuse.
Not really surprising if you accept that the conservatives
tend toward a more literal reading of the Constitution,
which clearly restricts takings to those "for public use".
Twisting the meaning of "public use" to include generating a
higher tax base (to be used, of course, for the "public
good") would be more of a "progressive" idea.
But whatever prompted it, it's a bad decision.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=04-108
"Lost Liberty Hotel" with the "Just Desserts Cafe". I look forward to its
opening! But they've got to get that bum living on the property off!
--
Bob C.
"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tracy Hamilton" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Let's raze Dave Souter's house for a hotel! |
29 Jun 2005 09:49:13 AM |
|
|
"Lt. Kizhe Catson" <lt.kizhe@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:42C2ACAB.5060803@gmail.com...
magilla wrote:
http://www.freestarmedia.com/hotellostliberty2.html
Sweeeeeeet.
I'll send a few bucks to invest in that.
I read the story on the original ruling on a news site. Interesting
that the dissenting justices were (Scalia and Rhenquist IIRC) were
people I usually disagree with on other topics. But not this time: I
can't imagine a more blatant carte blanche for large corporations to
trample all over the little guy.
Fortunately, I live in a jurisdiction where SCotUS' writ does not run.
Yet.
I am sure it can be arranged to take over Canada, using eminent domain.
Then the rulings on eminent domain will apply.
The hotel idea was great - it might actually be possible! Why not all
of the Justices?
Tracy P. Hamilton
.
|
|
|
|
