supreme court's eminent domain decision not so obvious

[rone]

Stephen Burzio, an attorney who represents low-income tenants in New York City, criticizes newspaper editorials regarding the Kelo v. New London decision.  It's an easy read, whereas Armando's summary on Daily Kos is more technical, but also quotes in detail the Majority's decision as well as the dissent in order to buttress his point.  Anyway, it's all more complicated than i imagined it to be, but i'm still not happy about how things fell out, especially with Freeport's city hall's quick decision to take advantage of the ruling.

Comments

[glitter-ninja.livejournal.com]

My feeling is that a lot of the precedent in Kelo is probably dumb and bad, but I am pretty much a legal ignoramus.

My take on the article is that the author is saying, hey, politicians used eminent domain for bad reasons before, why complain now? Personally, I see this as a reason to examine the entire concept of eminent domain rather than just shrug my shoulders and say, oh well, government has misused eminent domain for decades, I'll go back to worrying about reality television instead.

widely distributed petitions to impeach all the justices involved

I signed one of those, having never signed one before, and under the belief that an online petition means nothing at all. This was the one Kenton posted, which was well-written compared to the others (try sampling a few of the other top petitions for a chuckle one day). I've followed it and I think there's 4,000 signatures, which is something like .000000000002% of the population.