Supreme Court... Totalitarian?

And what the hell is going on with a Supreme Court regularly described as "Conservative" saying that "fostering economic development is an appropriate use of the government's power of eminent domain."

So, if the city decides a hotel is better on your property than your home, then it's fine.

How about if there is an individual who is upset about development encroaching on his home or business who voices that opinion and fights the development? Sudden retribution for a person standng up for their land rights might come in the form of a PARKING LOT where your house used to sit, provided that parking lot fosters economic growth.

Sorry, I think this smacks of big brother, big business, and totalitarianism. We need to get more conservative judges on the court, and Bush had better not screw this up.

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas objected that "the words 'for public use' do not realistically exclude any takings, and thus do not exert any constraint on the eminent domain power.''

O'Connor said, "Under the banner of economic development, all private property is now vulnerable to being taken and transferred to another private owner, so long as it might be upgraded.''

Wild. This is so much more important than anything else going on in the news, and it seems as if it being buried. I hope I am not the only one who understands how serious this could be...

coverage from Fox News
coverage from Mercury News