Eminent Domain ruling

[nolawitch58]

Are they serious about this? Now I have to worry about my condo being confiscated because it's in a great location and no giant corporation owns it to make megabuck off of? Here is more analysis of the problem. Here is a link to the discussion over at UF. Here is another link to an organization devoted to informing people about such issues.

People, if you don't think the government is going the way of fascism and corporatism at the expense of the citizenry, then you are so blindly deluded, it's not funny. All we can do at this point, since the Supreme Court has ruled, is hope that our little slice of the American Pie doesn't look attractive to some developer. We can also try to elect people who don't favor the corporations so slavishly. We can protest and make noise when others' property is seized in hopes that maybe the issue will be revisited. Of course, the Supreme Court is likely to become more conservative and beholden to the right wing who dearly love this sort of encroachment upon the individual.

I'm pissed at the Times-Picayune for wasting column inches on that moronic little fuck in Utah and that rich bitch in Aruba when this eminent domain issue affects people in Louisiana. The fucking electronic media is wasteful as well. Missing local dipshits is not national news. I feel a letter to the editor coming on. Today the front section of the paper wasted a third of a page on that stupid little fucker in Utah and another third of a page on some creaky couple in Rhode Island who had the longest marriage according to Guiness. I realize the American public is so shallow as to genuinely give a shit about these non-stories. It's really appalling that they don't care about issues that potentially affect them personally. Still, it's the responsibility of the media (or it used to be before every outlet was owned by one of half a dozen corporations) to report the news that's important for their readership to know.

It's the responsibility of the media to make the important interesting and not just make the interesting important. They are horrendously remiss in their responsibility. They feel their responsibility has shifted toward making the stockholders of Clear Channel or Knight-Ridder or whatever other corporation owns them happy. We are royally ratfucked if they don't revert to the position they used to hold as dispassionate reporters. Celebrity gossip is not news, people.

Comments

[law-witch.livejournal.com]

OMG'ss, can you believe it????

It's one thing to lose your home for a highway, but for a Walmart????

I see this getting REALLY nasty!

It sucks major ass.

[nolawitch.livejournal.com]

I live in a condo on a major street which is slowly creeping commercial. I'd hate for the fifteen other owners and me to get thrown out so that some company could build another office building here.

I am sick shitless of the direction this country is going. Once folks start having their property seized, they may see that the government is all about kissing corporate keister. As they erode the Middle Class further and further downward, we'll become a nation of serfs. Then it will be time to get out the pitchforks and torches and storm the castles. I would guess that the local government will be able to set a so-called fair price for the property which will be insufficient to enable an owner to purchase a comparable property elsewhere. The owner will end up renting or moving further away from town. I don't see where that's a win-win situation for society at all.

I'm shocked

[fakiiri.livejournal.com]

That's a outrageous move from the Supreme Court. It's interesting how things like that happen in a coutry that is known (or used to be known) as the biggest supporter of individual rights.

[nolawitch.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that tripped me out too. You'd better hope your home isn't in too nice of a location. Now I really wish I'd spent the extra money back when I was buying for that nice place on a dead end street next to a cemetery. That wouldn't be nearly as attractive to some company as my current location.

Insert broken clock metaphor here

[tigrismus.livejournal.com]

The liberal justices are wrong here, they were wrong on the marijuana case, too.

Correct me if I'm wrong

[real-skeptic.livejournal.com]

...but as far as I remember, the right-wing in the USA is supposed to be for individual rights and against government intervention, and the left-wing is for more intervention.

So that may explain why the conservatiev judges don't want to impose a ruling on individuals without any clear wrongdoing on their side?

whereas what ACTUALLY trickles down is horsepiss.

[mcnutcase.livejournal.com]

And that's if you're lucky. More usually it's rancid hog diahorrea.

[celticess.livejournal.com]

Another house thing you might not of heard. It's a new scam in canada anyways. Becareful someone doesn't sell your house on you. They find a place they like. They go to the land office and claim they just bought it so do the transfer papers and take out another morgage. They get the morgage money you find out later when collection people start hassling you or you suddenly find out your house is for sale. An expensive court fight get's your property back but usually these guys get just a slap on the wrist for it. It's a problem prevelant in Ontario from what I can tell. Not sure how far it will spread though but people are peeved their homes aren't really their homes and it never occured to them someone could steal a house but there is a way to do it... :(

I don't think they can do that here.

[nolawitch.livejournal.com]

Before you can get your name on property here, the law requires a title search to see if there are any liens against it already. Nobody could just go to the country clerk and claim anything without a proper title search. lab_rattus is extremely familiar with this section of the law since she worked at a title company years ago.

Re: I don't think they can do that here.

[celticess.livejournal.com]

I think the theif had done some sort of title search. He was a paralegal by profession originally but it had shown he'd done this to numerous people and was under deportation order. :P He had never met the man in the story whose house he stold but had forged his signature on the title when claiming he bought the house. So I think maybe there is a signature on titles when you do a search but no idea how he copied it. I didn't think your aloud to copy such documents. So maybe he had some sort of portable scanner and that is how he faked it. It had been on W5 I think.

Disturbing that government or a theif can just take land like that anyways. :( But I suppose they did it a few hundred years ago and miss the freedom to do that.

Re: I don't think they can do that here.

[lab-rattus.livejournal.com]

Correct, at least in part. Title search is done before you buy your property, or take out a mortgage required by the Mortgage company to ensure property is free of any encumbrances and that said owner is truly the said. That part is called the "chain of title", aka a conveyance search. Most chains are simple and you can go right on back to the property developer. It gets real fun when you throw in successions, wills, life time usufruct, divorces, community property states vs, non-community...Then there are very old properties that can be a freaking nightmare. This is one reason why you buy Title insurance. Do not know about Ariendean's reference in Ontario, sounds almost urban legendy...mortgage company/lender would issue a new mortgage with out the proper documentation. If they do they are on the hook not the property owner. Hope this is clear...been out of the title business for awhile

[drgndancer.livejournal.com]

Interestingly, if you read the article, Scalia, O'Conner, Rehnquis, and Thomas were the dissent. The people we usually count on to agree with us don't on this one, and the ultra conservatives do. Just goes to show that "liberal" and "conservative" are labels, and labels don't always play out.

[nolawitch.livejournal.com]

Those justices are old-school conservatives, not the neo-con types that are likely to be elevated if any vacancies occur in the future. Your place is in the Marigny which is designated as a historic section, n'est-ce pas? They aren't likely to go after you.

Vel is worried and she's three blocks off the main drag. I'm going to bring up this troubling issue at the next condo meeting in a few months. Several houses up the street from me have already been razed over the past year. That dripping sound is developers drooling over the possibilities along this stretch of street.

[drgndancer.livejournal.com]

I highly doubt that they are going to go around randomly taking people's houses away. This is a stupid decision, yes, but I really don't think anyone is going to be showing up at your door with eviction papers tomorrow. For one thing, councils are still elected bodies, and they are not generally going to be throwing people off their own property without a really compelling reason. For another your complex is part of a large residential block. Plus Jefferson Parish has plenty of undeveloped land where they could put anything large enough to matter. On top of everything else, Eminent Domain claims are expensive to get through, most businesses, if they want to build where you are, would rather just offer you half again the value of you property and get you to move willingly and happily.

[thewrongcrowd.livejournal.com]

Actually Scalia is very much a new school conservative. He is currently the strongest 'originalist' ideologue on the court, with Thomas the second. O'Connor is and Rehnquist are 'traditional' conservatives, but have shown they're willing to buy into the neocons' arguments at times.

Sadly, he is probably the next Chief Justice as well.

[goddessmusings.livejournal.com]

I just saw this in another friends LJ- grrr....so pissed. What the fuck? If Home Depot or Wal-Mart decides my property looks good I'm out a house...not to mention the profit of selling the house. Because you know they aren't going to pay you what you could actually get if you sold the place.

Not to mention- is it our current goverments goal to completely fuck over the middle class (or eliminate it)? It seems like we are rapidly heading towards a country made up of rich and dirt poor.

As to the TP- well, there are reasons they've never won any major journalism awards. I learned a phrase long ago in my mass communication classes, "The masses are asses" and it's soooo true. Sadly, that is what we gear TV programs, new casts ("if it bleeds, it leads") and print media towards. This is why Tom "I'm a fucking idiot" Cruise and his dippy fiance Katie Holmes get more airtime than real news that actually affects the general public.

I thought the whole eminent domain deal

[voxwoman.livejournal.com]

was that you had to be paid fair market value for your land.

Re: I thought the whole eminent domain deal

[lab-rattus.livejournal.com]

Part of it yes, but eminent domain, the way that I undertsand the 5th amendment is property to be used for public use, as in roadways, railroads, publics works/utilities, not an upscale office building.

Re: I thought the whole eminent domain deal

[voxwoman.livejournal.com]

I thought it was for an hotel/convention center initially (but that would still be privately owned. Hence the precident)

Not to beg the point (because I agree the ruling is awful), but consider how roads (especially highways and exits) are "planned" -- and how many private business types profit from such plans. It's really not so different, if you think about it - and maybe the court's just admitting to it, finally.

Re: I thought the whole eminent domain deal

[lab-rattus.livejournal.com]

However, hotel/conventon center still not the same as a public works or road project, except for the tax dollars that it may generate. Still my humble opinion is that private properyright should always have a greater weight. I just really detest when people think the "government knows" what is best for me.
Yes private industry does benefit from theconstuction of roads and public utilities, but you, me the local unwashed masses benefit froma nifty new road. How do you, me and the unwashed masses benefit from even a convention center/hotel(other than tax dollars)? Last I heard you cannot drive on a convention center.

[solitary4now.livejournal.com]

Its all a matter of money...if you have enough you can buy anything including another individuals rights to have a home....It fucks big time..there are moments I am so overwhelmed about the rich assholes, who hold nothing but the dollar sacred, that my mind just switches OFF. Im not kidding...Its like I cant even comprehend anyone having so much money and clout that they can take the ground right fron underneath you while you sleep...

[entheos93.livejournal.com]

Yep, they can do that.

I was planning on buying a house in the Lower Garden District- the funky area near the river, other side of Magazine. Beautiful old houses, really. But I'm wary to do this, because they are expanding the Convention Center all the way up here. Now, at this point, one can go to the city and see the plans of what they are going to do (and I would- because people have lost property to this already), but the problem is, the hotel chains are drooling over the whole area, and nobody knows what they are going to do yet. We can definitely bet thet the good ol' city of New Orleans will let them do what they please, though.

I was appalled, too

[voxwoman.livejournal.com]

until I queried a friend (via private email) who actually lives in New London, CT, about this (and he's been championing left-wing liberal ideals on our Usenet forum for weeks now; currently, he's on an anti-corporate, "rich guys are selfish bastards and should be taxed more" rampage), and these are his comments. I asked him This is your neck of the woods, isn't it? His reply:

"Only two or three blocks away -- a ratty neighborhood which New London, which is desperately short of taxable real estate (50% belongs to non-profits), is trying to develop. The [law]suit already trashed the planned hotel and convention center. Though in truth, I can't imagine that anyone would come to a hotel and convention center in New London . . . and a Coast Guard museum? Who in the world is going to go to a Coast Guard museum?

Most of the quaint areas in New London were destroyed by urban renewal and industrialization. It's never going to compete with Mystic and Stonington which are well preserved and really are quaint . . .

I like the way the press repeats the heart string arguments of the opponents by referring to the neighborhood "working class" rather than run down and talking about 80-year-old grandmas (all of whom are slated to go to the old folk's home soon anyway) . . ."

I was kinda surprised at his reaction. Maybe it's not as bad as the articles are making it sound? (or do I have to pull my head out of the sand?). The government has always had the right of eminent domain. Does it really change things if you are forced out because they want to put a highway through your yard, or if you're forced out because they want to re-zone your area from residential to commercial? You're forced to sell and move in either case.

Re: I was appalled, too

[nolawitch.livejournal.com]

It DOES change things. Putting a road or bridge or public infrastructure is WAY different from letting some company force you off your property, ratty or not, and make a fuckload of money from it. And if they were sure that the eighty-year-old grandmas were sure to go to the old folks' home soon, then they could have been patient and bought the property from the heirs after the grandmas croaked.

If the property is seized for public infrastructure, it passes the test of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of private property being taken for public use without just compensation. If private property is seized for other private use, that is blatantly unConstitutional. It's the same sort of horrible crap the robber barons used to get away with.

Re: I was appalled, too

[lab-rattus.livejournal.com]

My God we agree. The apocolypse must be at hand. I still love ya!

We call it a "Compulsory Purchase Order" in the UK.

[breeze-block.livejournal.com]

It sounds nicer than Eminent Domain but basically means the same. A council official can decide that you live in an ugly house that stands right in the middle of a new bypass route and can buy your house for much less than market value and you have no choice but to accept. We have had this for years - in fact the very first episode of HHGG shows Arthur Dent being the victim of a CPO.

It dont make it any less wrong tho'. Bastards.