Featured Posts

I Will Not Comply John Hood has written a very compelling article at the Carolina Journal that sums up the health control legislation's end game. In discussing the legislative maneuvering, he makes this, I believe, accurate...

Read more...

Find The Pea The phrase that keeps popping into my head whenever I read anything about the health system takeover bill is, "how stupid do they think we are?" The rhetorical answer, sadly, is, "pretty stupid." After...

Read more...

Four Bells, Nancy Admiral Farragut Pelosi has a wonderful idea, "Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!" House Speaker Nancy Pelosi urged her colleagues to back a major overhaul of U.S. health care even if it threatens...

Read more...

Polling Conservative Bloggers On Gay Marriage, Impeachment,... John Hawkins recently polled right-of-center/conservative bloggers asking questions copied from a Daily Kos/Research 2000 poll. Here's why. The poll results were treated as suspect mainly because some...

Read more...

A New Day Today is going to be an adventure. If you are a regular reader you know that I don't talk a lot about my day job. While I do mention work occasionally, I seldom, if ever, mention the company I work...

Read more...

  • Prev
  • Next

Kelo Endgame

Posted on : 06-06-2006 | By : Jim Lynch | In : Politics, SCOTUS

Tags: , ,

0

The City Council of New London, Connecticut has acted on the worst Supreme Court decision in recent history, taking it to it’s logic-defying conclusion and voting to evict the last two homeowners.

The City Council voted 5-2 in favor of eviction Monday. An attorney for the residents said they are considering continuing to fight.

“You are a disgrace to the city, the state and the nation,” one of the residents, Michael Cristofaro, told council members who voted to evict.

The city has been trying for a decade to redevelop the once-vibrant neighborhood at the point where the Thames River joins the sea. Seven homeowners challenged the city’s plans to seize the property and build a hotel, convention center and upscale condominiums, saying eminent domain can’t be used to make way for private development.

Every time I read about this story I struggle to understand how this makes any sense at all. It’s just wrong in so many ways. I was shocked by the SCOTUS decision, outraged by the actions of the council, and scared by the number of people who don’t see this as a problem.

At least one council member gets it.

However, Charles Frink, one of the two council members who voted against the plan, said supporters should admit their mistake.

“I can’t accept a possible reduction in taxes by having neighbors thrown out of their property,” he said. “This is morally abhorrent to me. I refuse to profit from my neighbor’s pain.”

And let’s not forget, as it happened to the residents of New London, it could happen to you.

UPDATE: Thanks to Michelle for the link, and for pointing to this detailed post at BizzyBlog.

Sphere: Related Content

254 views

Comments (0)

links from TechnoratiCristofaro singled out five of the seven council members who favor taking the property. “You are a disgrace to the city, the state and the nation,” he said. [IMG hands.jpg] Blog coverage: Bizzy BlogBright and Early Previous: Your home is not your castle Home matters: the day after Life, liberty and property Holding the homewreckers accountable