But I thought this was the one thing the Republicans were good for!

[fabrisse]

This link is to a NyTimes article.

I'm very glad that my finances got so bad that I had to sell my condominium to eat. Never thought I'd type that sentence.

For better or worse this country was founded on property and property rights. It was the fact that the British Crown was interfering with our rights as property owners (the whole "no taxation without representation" thing) that made us go to war.

So here we have the majority on the Supreme Court saying that the government may now condemn houses that aren't decrepit in order to award that property to a private developer because the local government think that hotels and water sports will be better for the town than homeownership.

I hope that every single house in that town is on the market for sale tomorrow.

Damn!

I thought Souter would be on the property rights side. I expect Breyer to be an idiot, but Souter!?

Comments

[mecurtin.livejournal.com]

I don't get it at all. When I agree with Scalia and against Souter and Stewart, it's good skatin' weather in Hell.

[moria923.livejournal.com]

I was practically screaming when I found out about the decision. What it really means is: we don't have any rights at all to our homes. I can't believe this was the intent of the Fifth Amendment. Well, we still own our home, which means . . . nothing. Aaaarrrrgh!

[kstanley.livejournal.com]

Yeah there was a bit about this in MSNBC yesterday. It's so hard to believe. Honestly, I don't know what this country is coming to. It seems as if the rights of corporations are protected more than ever.