Quote:
Originally posted by Tom Earp
[B]ktsnake, that is what is so interesting.
The Federal Govt. Will not usurp Local Laws. But, it seems to be happening more and more.
States rights are becoming about as ridiged as Individual rights. Right!
|
The case as I understand it just says that states, cities, counties, whatever can create laws to take land from private citizens for a more 'public' use. It would stand to reason that they could also create laws forbidding the practice.
What I'm saying Tom is that most communities already take land by eminent domain on a routine basis. My community actually takes land this way and then leases it to businesses at bargain basement prices -- they tell the public that this is good for everyone because of lower prices and increased tax revenue. In the case of Oklahoma City, I'd say that the Bass Pro Shops was a pretty decent deal that spurred some major growth in our "Bricktown" entertainment district.
I agree with I think Justice O'Connor in her assessment that the law puts the wealthy corporations at a major advantage over private landowners.
My hope is that this decision spurns public support and therefore legislative support for more laws protecting private property rights. In some communities, we actually may end up closing some of the loopholes that have been in use for quite awhile.
As for the Dallas example, unless Texas law says otherwise, it would have been legal before the decision because the stadium would probably have been owned by the city and leased to the Cowboys -- that is the deal that y'all have with Jones, isn't it?
Threaded Mode