Kelo Inoculation
When a political activist from Los Angeles, Logan Darrow Clements, suggested that Justice Souter's 200 year old house and property in New Hampshire should be seized and replaced with a hotel, he got more encouragement than he expected
"People are not just supportive, they are enthusiastic like I have never seen before in my life," said Clements, 36. He said thousands of people had contacted him to cheer his "Lost Liberty Hotel" project.
It seems the rush by states to inoculate their citizens from the Kelo decision is spreading far and wide.
In Alabama Wednesday, Gov. Bob Riley will sign a law that prohibits the state, cities and counties from taking private property for retail, office, commercial, industrial or residential development. "We don't like anybody messing with our dogs, our guns, our hunting rights or trying to take property from us," says state Sen. Jack Biddle, a sponsor of the law.
Delaware has also changed their laws. Interestingly, this is one of those issues that has activists from the Left and the Right working towards similar ends.
The issue has spawned an unusual alliance among conservatives opposed to the principle of government seizing private property and liberals worried that poor people would be the most likely victims.
Though the Supreme Court decision was rendered over the objections of the conservative side of the court, Howard Dean, brilliant spokesman for the Democratic party, attempted to rewrite history by blaming not only conservatives, but Bush himself for the decision.
Dean said, "The president and his right-wing Supreme Court think it is 'okay' to have the government take your house if they feel like putting a hotel where your house is. We think that eminent domain does not belong in the private sector. It is for public use only."
Not even the Krazy Kids at Kos' place are buying that as Paul of the Wizbang blog noted.
After Howard Dean made a complete ass of himself with the Supreme Court comment, (believe it or not) one of the Kos kids called the comments "[not] even remotely defensible."
The poster did not explain the comments to the kids however... Which is where the fun begins:
Read the whole post. It will certainly brighten up your Friday afternoon; in a head-shaking incredulous sorta way.
Regardless, the Kelo decision is provoking precisely what I had hoped back when I first blogged about it
Since it is clear that the Supreme Court can not be trusted with correctly interpreting the Fifth Amendment, the next political campaign should be about Amending the Constitution to precisely say that Government can not abrogate the private property rights of citizens by taking their property and giving it to other citizens in a for-profit venture.
Is that too much to ask?
Failing that, or perhaps in addition to that, each State should amend their Constitutions with similar words. As of now, only two State's Constitutions have such words. However, since the Supreme Court has essentially interpreted the US Constitution this way, those State's Constitutions are in legal limbo with regards to this matter.
Actually, the fact that the State's are leading the charge is the preferred solution from a Federalism standpoint, but something must be done at the Federal level to assure as much as possible the idea of enumerated powers prevails in both the judiciary as well as the legislature.
The Enumerated Powers Act is a start but it seems that it is languishing in committee. It's no surprise that legislators don't want to be bound by that pesky "Constitution" thing.
And, I suspect, the courts are a bit circumspect themselves.
Which is precisely why we, the citizens, should be demanding it.
Which is precisely why we, the citizens need to hold our representatives accountable for it.
