(no subject)

Kerry Country (via Rand Simberg) has a good take on the Kelo-New London SCOTUS ruling that municipalities may use eminent domain to sieze private property for economic development reasons alone:

This has to be a godsend for towns and cities that have been stymied so far in their attempts to shut-down any businesses, corporations, or private groups of which they disapprove. Private gun ranges, airfields, RV tracts, hunting preserves, fishing resources, minority religious congregations, newspapers -- all are now fair targets for seizure and closure "for the economic benefit of the people."

There's a little glimmer of hope in what Kennedy wrote in his opinion. Still, as Hold the Mayo says, starting today you no longer own a house or property; you're just temporarily occupying it until such time as developers decide they want to have the local government take it.

I note that the five justices ruling for the expanded eminent domain were Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg and Breyer, while Scalia, Thomas, O'Connor, and Rehnquist were dissenting. Sorry, but this one can't be blamed on the conservatives - this was done by the "moderates" of the court, God help us.