Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The_Jazz
First, this issue is strictly local, just like all real estate. If local/state governments don't like this application of eminent domain, they can change the law. The people of New London, CT are at fault in this case, not SCOTUS. It was the New London law that was tested, and it did not magically become the law of the land because SCOTUS approved it. The people of New London are welcome to throw out the bastards that wrote this law with its loopholes and have the replacements go back to the drawing board, but this ruling doesn't have any effect on the people of Alabama, who have already passed a ban on exactly this kind of use of eminent domain.
|
using the 'blight' aspect of a council power is strictly based on the eminent domain principle. by simply saying that it's a local law, therefore a local issue is tantamount to saying that the constitution doesn't apply in new london. It's not any different than denver, Colorados ban on carrying a handgun. They are basically stating that the state constitution does not apply to them.
Either the US constitution is the supreme law of the land or it is not. I fail to see how any logical and rational person could remotely suggest otherwise.
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."
|