I share John's disbelief at the Court's decision in Kelo vs New London. We all heard accounts that IJ had not done as well as they could have during arguments, but I suspect that most of us held out hope that the Justices would recognize the fundamental nature of property rights, would recognize the justification for such takings must go beyond 'efforts to improve the tax base' or economic development plans. Those kinds of justification now put all property at risk. I would not have thought it possible, and am still reeling.
Comments