• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Looking for "worst case" Imminent Domain Example

Caveman

Platinum Member
Thinking P&N experts might have a few they know about...

Looking for a case (doesn't have to be well known) that shows a complete injustice by carrying out Imminent Domain Policy... Can be Federal, State, or City govt...

Looking for atear-jerker type story where Mr. and Mrs Joe American worked all their lives for their homestead only to have it "purchased" for use by the govt... That sort of thing...

Can anyone help? Sources must be credible...

 
Here's a good one that went to SCOTUS: Kelo v. City of New London

The Court held in a 5?4 decision that the general benefits a community enjoyed from economic growth qualified such redevelopment plans as a permissible "public use" under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

Notice the bolded.
 
the flight 93 "memorial" is a huge one.

there was a sopposed to be a huge highway going up through i think colorado where they wanted to take a .4 mile wide stretch of property all the way.

 


uh, no land has so far been taken for the 'trans texas corridor,' which is dead, politically. we need a highway that bypasses cities here. the northeast is full of them, but in texas the interstates go straight into the cities. perry's grand vision of a huge wide belt with freight rail, power lines, truck lanes, internet bandwidth, etc., crisscrossing texas was overreaching, but the highway is still needed.
 
Originally posted by: waggy
the flight 93 "memorial" is a huge one.

there was a sopposed to be a huge highway going up through i think colorado where they wanted to take a .4 mile wide stretch of property all the way.

THIS.


Lets support america and freedom by taking land from americans.
 
Like blackangst1 said, look into Kelo v. New London. Dig around with this and there will be a whole lot.

A personal favorite that I read about a while ago was a city wanting to seize land from a church (no taxes) and give it to Costco (+++ taxes). The "logic" was that the tax revenue from Costco was a public benefit, so they condemned the Church's land.

Press release from quick research. You can probably dig up more about this indecent. It was cited in arguments for Kelo v. New London.
 
Originally posted by: Sheik Yerbouti
Originally posted by: Triumph
Originally posted by: CrimsonWolf
Originally posted by: OCguy
Originally posted by: Caveman
Thanks folks...

Yeah... eminent, not imminent...

Well its a mute point.

Irregardless, the spelling is important.

Regardless, irregardless isn't a word.

and ffs it's moot, not mute

I think that was the point. It is called humor.
 
Originally posted by: Ldir
Originally posted by: Sheik Yerbouti
Originally posted by: Triumph
Originally posted by: CrimsonWolf
Originally posted by: OCguy
Originally posted by: Caveman
Thanks folks...

Yeah... eminent, not imminent...

Well its a mute point.

Irregardless, the spelling is important.

Regardless, irregardless isn't a word.

and ffs it's moot, not mute

I think that was the point. It is called humor.

fresh out, and don't see me going to the store any time soon.
 
Originally posted by: Sheik Yerbouti
Originally posted by: Ldir
I think that was the point. It is called humor.

fresh out, and don't see me going to the store any time soon.

Then you came to the right place. P&N is a great place for humor. Information and insight, not really, but it has endless humor.
 
Originally posted by: CrimsonWolf
Like blackangst1 said, look into Kelo v. New London. Dig around with this and there will be a whole lot.

A personal favorite that I read about a while ago was a city wanting to seize land from a church (no taxes) and give it to Costco (+++ taxes). The "logic" was that the tax revenue from Costco was a public benefit, so they condemned the Church's land.

Press release from quick research. You can probably dig up more about this indecent. It was cited in arguments for Kelo v. New London.

damn. i didnt know that about costco. thats disgusting that they do such stuff.
 
Back
Top