[/quote]Werthless wrote:TenuredVulture wrote:Except that everyone agrees that there are legitimate uses for eminent domain. Roads and schools need to be built somewhere. There are some really interesting eminent domain cases--in Hawaii, for instance, 72 landowners held 47% of the land, government held 49%, and everyone else had 4%. Land reform under eminent domain required the sale of some of the land to others. Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff was a unanimous decision in 1984. So, as you can see, precedent has given state and local governments wide latitude at determining what counts as public use.
So, yes, we agree that what happened in Kelo was an injustice. However, it might be reasonable to argue that the Supreme Court is not the forum for the redress of all injustice.
I would make a similar argument concerning gay marriage--I believe in marriage equality, but I believe that it is better to establish gay marriage legislatively rather than judicially.
Schools can be built anywhere.
Not necessarily. First, it isn't like the government has land just lying around--even if you can build a school where no one lives, you may still need eminent domain to acquire that land. Also, you want to build a school near where people live. There are dozens of factors to consider. Which is why the US Supreme Court may have determined that it's better to leave these decisions up to local governments. Again, I think the decision in Kelo was wrong, but it's not patently wrong on its face. It's more like Belichik going for it last night wrong.
