Sure am glad I don't own property in the US

Discussion in 'After Hours Lounge (Off Topic)' started by Jeff Ulmer, Jun 23, 2005.

  1. Jeff Ulmer

    Jeff Ulmer Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 1998
    Messages:
    5,584
    Likes Received:
    0
    It used to be that when you paid good money for a piece of land it was yours until you wanted to sell, assuming you kept up with your taxes and so forth. Now, the federal US courts have ruled that local governments can sieze your land for whatever reason they want, not just the public good as it used to be. That means that when WalMart or any other developer with lots of cash wants your property, out you go. There is no provision for negotiating a decent buyout either from what I can see, your land is simply taken, your house bulldozed and your family uprooted, for whatever the local area deems appropriate.

    Sure am glad I live n Canada where that few hundred grand actually allows me to own my property, and if someone wants it, they pay my price.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2005/LAW/06/2....ap/index.html
     
  2. Mort Corey

    Mort Corey Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2003
    Messages:
    981
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's even better than that (eminent domain) in some instances. Should you rent your property to someone that uses it for illegal purposes, it can be seized and sold without any compensation at all. Is this a great country or what?

    Mort
     
  3. ThomasC

    ThomasC Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2001
    Messages:
    6,526
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, at least the plans are on display...[​IMG]
     
  4. RichP

    RichP Second Unit

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 1998
    Messages:
    295
    Likes Received:
    0


    Beware of the Leopard!
     
  5. Michael Reuben

    Michael Reuben Studio Mogul

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 1998
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    2
    This has nothing whatsoever to do with the law of eminent domain or the new S. Ct. ruling.

    M.
     
  6. SteveA

    SteveA Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    May 25, 2000
    Messages:
    700
    Likes Received:
    0
    Most of the justices who voted in favor of this ruling are Clinton appointees. Clinton is from Arkansas. Wal-Mart is based in Arkansas. Coincidence? Hmmmm.
     
  7. Nathan*W

    Nathan*W Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2001
    Messages:
    1,068
    Likes Received:
    0
    Real Name:
    Nathan
    I don't agree with this decision.
     
  8. RobertR

    RobertR Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 1998
    Messages:
    9,694
    Likes Received:
    164
    I vehemently oppose this decision. The majority showed classic anti-individualist thinking here.
     
  9. Mort Corey

    Mort Corey Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2003
    Messages:
    981
    Likes Received:
    0


    The point I was making is that the concept of private property has largely become an illusion. SCOTUS has upheld this type of travesty as well.

    Mort
     
  10. Michael Reuben

    Michael Reuben Studio Mogul

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 1998
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    2
    Unlike forfeiture laws, the law of eminent domain goes back to the founding of the United States. One may feel (as the dissenters obviously did) that this latest ruling represents an unwarranted extension of states' power to seize private land, but the power itself is nothing new.

    M.
     
  11. Michael Reuben

    Michael Reuben Studio Mogul

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 1998
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    2
    Untrue. Only two of the five votes were Clinton nominees (Ginsburg and Breyer). The opinion was written by Stevens, a Ford nominee, and the other two votes were Kennedy (nominated by Reagan) and Souter (nominated by the first Pres. Bush).

    M.
     
  12. Mort Corey

    Mort Corey Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2003
    Messages:
    981
    Likes Received:
    0


    It's the court(s) that have expanded the notion of "public use" that is the problem. (Not relevant, but the "commerce clause" has been bastardized much in the same way). Agreed, the concept is not new, it's the implementation.

    Mort
     
  13. Eric Kahn

    Eric Kahn Guest

    write your congress member (if you are a US citizen) and complain about this ruling, I already did, congress can enact a law to prevent this typr of eminant domain land grab
     
  14. Moe Maishlish

    Moe Maishlish Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 1999
    Messages:
    992
    Likes Received:
    0
    [​IMG]

    Three situations come to mind:

    1)What if say, Hilton Hotels comes along and says to the local government "You know, we'd really like to build a brand new luxury resort on that plot of land that the local Wal-Mart is sitting on."... what then?

    2)What if, say, Walmart or Hilton Hotels comes along and says to the local government "You know, we'd REALLY like to build a new luxury resort/Wal-Mart at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in DC."... what then?

    3)What if, say, Walmart or Hilton Hotels or Huge Corporation B comes along and says to the local government "You know, we'd REALLY REALLY like to build a new luxury resort/Wal-Mart/Sewage Treatment Plant at the 5 locations where these (approving) Supreme Court Justices live."... what then?

    Personally, someone shows up at my home in a bulldozer ready to kick me out of my house, they'd find me sitting on the lawn, chained to the house, reading a copy of Hitchhikers Guide... out LOUD!

    Moe.
     
  15. Matt Stieg

    Matt Stieg Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2003
    Messages:
    228
    Likes Received:
    0
    In my town of Carmel, IN, we've got a jerk of a mayor that's kicking people out of homes right and left to build town houses, condos, and office buildings.
     
  16. Paul_Medenwaldt

    Paul_Medenwaldt Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2001
    Messages:
    649
    Likes Received:
    0


    I think instead of saying who appointed the judges, it shuld of been referred to as which way those judges lean. Now most everyone knows which way each justice leans when it may come to their philosiphies.

    My suprise in the decision was that the more conservative judges voted the way they did and the more liberal judges voted the way they did. I believe Kennedy and O'Connor are the justice's that always teeter in the middle.

    I disagree with the decision myself. Congress can always go back and fiddle with the law so that this judgement may no longer be valid, but then we'll have another case to fight that.

    Just to add to my statement, we had an issue locally here in the cities where Best Buy wanted to relocate their headquarters in Richfield. The same land they wanted was occupied by a car dealership that had been there for many years and was also the location of where scenes from Fargo was filmed. The city of Richfield bascially condemed the site, forcing the dealership to move out. There were many court cases battling this. Now on that location sits 2 large buildings which consist of the new Best Buy campus.

    Paul
     
  17. Michael Reuben

    Michael Reuben Studio Mogul

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 1998
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    2
    That would get us into politics, which would get this thread closed.

    I was responding to a specific factual assertion, nothing more.

    M.
     
  18. Paul_Medenwaldt

    Paul_Medenwaldt Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2001
    Messages:
    649
    Likes Received:
    0


    Your correct Michael. My concern was about president bashing and who appointed who and I wanted to focus more on the judges then the presidents who appointed them, or actually the main focus should be the decision itself.

    Paul
     
  19. David Brown Eyes

    David Brown Eyes Second Unit

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 1999
    Messages:
    262
    Likes Received:
    0
    HA HA HA HA.

    As a Native American.

    Welcome to my existence.

    On a more serious note, this is not out of the ordinary when it comes to land the individual is outright screwed if the government wants your land bad enough.
     
  20. Michael Reuben

    Michael Reuben Studio Mogul

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 1998
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    2
    Absolutely. One of the problems with reactions to Supreme Court decisions is that they're usually formed on the basis of news reports that have to be written under time constraints, without any opportunity for the reporters to read and digest the opinion(s) thoroughly.

    For example, many of the reports don't even mention Justice Kennedy's concurrence, which could be seen (and I too haven't had time to study it) as substantially limiting the impact of the majority opinion.

    M.
     

Share This Page