Ed. Note - This is the first article submitted by student ranks, which excites me greatly; I think this is a great opportunity for you. Keep 'em coming!
-Gabe
********
Back in 2005, many were startled by a Supreme Court case, which originated in my home state of Connecticut. Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005), gave unprecedented new power to the doctrine of Eminent Domain. Prior to that case, Eminent Domain allowed towns and states to take private property only for the purpose of “public use," and the town had to provide a hearing process and compensation for the owners. Kelo went to court because the city had authorized a separate organization (in the city’s name) to buy or take all property in a given area to develop a new office/retail center (definitely not public use – like a highway or park). When the homeowners refused to sell, their property was condemned.
The Supreme Court ruled against the homeowners, saying that under the 5th Amendment governments had broad taking powers. Due to Kelo, if a city wants a piece of property for any reason, it can be taken with almost no remedy to the owner beyond what the city decides to give as compensation (often well below market value). When this case was decided, I realized it was opening the way for bad things to happen.
Today I discovered a shocking aftermath of this case. In Texas a Christian ministry protested the city’s plan to allow sodomite parades. Now the ministry has been told to vacate the property it bought debt-free years ago. The town has decided to build a fire house on the spot. There is no recourse for this ministry, and what the town is offering as compensation is very small. A dangerous interpretation by the Supreme Court bears fruit in just 3 years.
Please pray for this ministry.
2 comments:
What concerns me most is not that a new firehouse is being built, but that there appears that it may be a sort of tit-for-tat excercise of Eminent Domain whereby the state is using its lawful power to eliminate, or greatly hamper, the operation of an organization that is possessed of views with which it does not agree. The legitimate exercise of power must not be used for political purposes. When such power is used to further a specific idea or political purpose it immediately becomes suspect and illegitimate.
The Kelo case acknowledged that although it broadly interpreted the power of Eminent Domain, local governments are free to enact stricter regulations on the use of that power. Perhaps this case will give rise to legislative proposals that impose a higher standard of what qualifies as a proper taking of private property when it appears that there could be some retaliation taking place against the views of the targeted private owner.
On the eve of our nation's 232nd birthday we are once again reminded that the free must always be vigilent, that those who possess liberty must never hesitate to use it, and that only by the consistent and careful application of our founding principles can we be sure that public policy in general will serve the great principles of of freedom.
You are right on. Yes maybe the legislatures will take action and remedy situations like this.
Can you imagine something like this happening to your church? Scary.
Post a Comment