the supreme court got it WRONG!!!
I am one of those people who think about politics far more than I talk it but this week’s verdict from the Supreme Court has me steamed so I will take moment and vent.
I understand that the supreme court is not a democratic body and they are not here to enact the will of the majority but I can't imagine walking up to somebody on the street and saying "do you think it is okay for the city government to take your land, give you however much money THEY think it is worth, so that they can turn around and lease it at a profit in order to general public revenue", and them saying "YEAH that seems like a good idea!"
More important than the fact that this SHOULD be unpopular, is that it should be unconstitutional. Thomas Jefferson, a fellow you may have heard of who played a minor role in the founding of our government, had a Lockeian view on government and the social contract. In the view of Jefferson (and most of the other founding fathers) life, liberty and PROPERTY, are inalienable rights that the government is here to protect. I imagine that the halls of Monticello shook and a cry of outrage could be heard at the Jefferson Memorial, Thursday while the verdict was read.
Perhaps this next line of thinks makes me a rightwing nut job but it is a parallel I think is valid which means I can post it here.
In the 1930s the German government, as part of their efforts to stabilize and stimulate their economy, began to cease high value property from a portion of their populace. This is essentially the same behavior the Supreme Court has declared legal in the freest country in the world. The German incident I am referencing is the relocation of German Jews from their private homes into ghettos, and it is now legal here.
(I’d love to hear proffessor Unmack's feed back on this subject if she reads this.)
I understand that the supreme court is not a democratic body and they are not here to enact the will of the majority but I can't imagine walking up to somebody on the street and saying "do you think it is okay for the city government to take your land, give you however much money THEY think it is worth, so that they can turn around and lease it at a profit in order to general public revenue", and them saying "YEAH that seems like a good idea!"
More important than the fact that this SHOULD be unpopular, is that it should be unconstitutional. Thomas Jefferson, a fellow you may have heard of who played a minor role in the founding of our government, had a Lockeian view on government and the social contract. In the view of Jefferson (and most of the other founding fathers) life, liberty and PROPERTY, are inalienable rights that the government is here to protect. I imagine that the halls of Monticello shook and a cry of outrage could be heard at the Jefferson Memorial, Thursday while the verdict was read.
Perhaps this next line of thinks makes me a rightwing nut job but it is a parallel I think is valid which means I can post it here.
In the 1930s the German government, as part of their efforts to stabilize and stimulate their economy, began to cease high value property from a portion of their populace. This is essentially the same behavior the Supreme Court has declared legal in the freest country in the world. The German incident I am referencing is the relocation of German Jews from their private homes into ghettos, and it is now legal here.
(I’d love to hear proffessor Unmack's feed back on this subject if she reads this.)
posted by a.lost.boy | 9:16 AM
1 Comments:
Oh believe me, you were not the only person completely pissed off at this ruling. Even worse, they can confiscate your property for COMMERCIAL purposes!!
Post a Comment
<< Home