Kelo v. City of New London,

[jocal505]

You need to make up your mind. You say you want a Clarence Thomas fan who hasn't said anything bad about TeamD gun bans and buyback programs, I offer you two such people, and now you say you actually want to hear from a heretic on the gun issue. Which is it?

FAIL. A bad faith response. Lacks sincerity. Silly cunt stuff, too. Try again, Dogballs.

jocal505 said:
I want Kelo Tom to lay out his justification for the broad strokes of what Leonard Leo has done through the Federalist Society.

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Trump's bump stock confiscation program is not a buyback and SCOTUS is OK with that result

...
The Supreme Court let stand a ruling by the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, which said the regulation was not subject to the Constitution’s Buybacks Clause because it was designed to protect health and safety.

A handful of states urged the justices to intervene, saying the case raised “important questions about how the ever-growing administrative state threatens” both property and gun rights.

The Justice Department, however, noted that the court has long held that the government “may prohibit the possession, or compel the destruction, of property that is ‘injurious’ to the ‘safety of the community’ without effecting a compensable buyback.”

There was no noted dissent from the Supreme Court decision not to take up the case, despite that the court expanded Second Amendment rights last term for the first time in more than a decade.

The case is McCutchen v. United States, U.S., No. 22-25, denied 11/14/22.

The ATF under Obama finding that bump stocka were not prohibited might have fooled those people, but being fooled doesn't give you a property right to own something dangerous.

This is similar to the FL effort to ban battlefield .22's. No compensation is required because they're so darn dangerous that people never had a "property right" to them in the first place. That's why several states submitted an amicus brief.

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

It's going about like you'd expect along Burnet Road. Government owners don't take care of property as well as private owners, big surprise.



They can if it's projected to bring in more tax revenue. That was the bottom line of the topic case and it hasn't been overruled.

We have a new court now, with reactionaries who might agree with Justice Thomas and the Kochy nutjobs at IJ on this issue. We'll see...

And on Burnet Road, Biden's 'Made In America' Plan Is Bullying Homeowners Off Their Land to Build a Taxpayer-Subsidized Chip Plant

...
What's happening now to the residents of Burnet Road looks a lot like the early stages of the U.S. Supreme Court's most famous case involving eminent domain.


That story began when city officials in New London, Connecticut—another down-on-its-luck postindustrial city that believed a renaissance could be created with the application of government power—tried to seize property in the Fort Trumbull neighborhood. The plan was to turn the land over to a private developer who would build a new corporate headquarters for Pfizer, a major pharmaceutical company. Susette Kelo and some of her neighbors refused to sell. They took the fight all the way to the Supreme Court.


They lost.


"In short, the Kelo decision is one of the most reviled opinions that the Supreme Court has ever handed down," says Bob Belden, a nutjob with the Institute for Justice
...

And the economic development went about like, well, the recent Foxconn one. And numerous others mentioned in the article. Another disastrous boondoggle is in the making on Burnet Road because "public use" means "lots of projected tax revenue."

Justice Thomas was right in the topic case. "Public use" needs to mean "public use."

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Amortization?

I'm still trying to adjust. Referring to actions that have always been called "takings" as "buybacks" seems foolish, dishonest, and clumsy to me, but I've been trying to go along to get along.

Now it turns out that a slow-motion buyback is called an amortization.

FFS people! If you slowly take something, it's a taking! If you take something but don't want to admit it because it's a gun, it's a taking! Can't we go back to a simpler time? I wish I could rant like Boothy about this.

Mauldin Amortizes U-Hauls

For more than 30 years, IJ has repeatedly seen how creative government can be at undermining property rights. But “amortization”—where the government bans a safe, preexisting use of property without compensation to the property owner—is particularly pernicious. That’s why IJ has teamed up with two South Carolina entrepreneurs to end this unconstitutional practice in the Palmetto State and beyond.


In 2013, Jeremy Sark opened his automotive repair business, Sark’s Automotive, on North Main Street in Mauldin, South Carolina. Within a year, he opened a U-Haul franchise overseen by his general manager, Marie Dougherty, and he has been renting more and more U-Hauls ever since. But last year the City Council amended Mauldin’s zoning ordinance to close all truck rental businesses inside the zone where Sark’s Automotive is located by the end of 2022.


Watch the case video!


Losing the U-Haul franchise has real ramifications for Jeremy, Marie, and their employees—the company’s U-Haul revenue was over $50,000 last year and has grown every year, and it gets additional revenue from repairing the vehicles of former U-Haul customers and the U-Haul vehicles themselves. Overall, Jeremy and Marie estimate that losing the U-Haul business will force them to lay off up to two full-time employees.


Ordinarily, safe preexisting uses of property are allowed to continue indefinitely following changes to a zoning code. But under amortization, the government puts a time limit on the preexisting use. The theory is that by allowing property owners a little extra time to continue exercising their rights, the government can avoid making the zoning change a “buyback” for which the government would owe “just compensation.” But that theory flies in the face of the IJ-led post-Kelo reforms that states like South Carolina enacted to prevent governments from using property regulations to shut down disfavored businesses.
...

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

"eminent" domain.

Hah! That's all I see.

I'm going to guess that another one of the wise people who knows it's best to ignore libertarians demonstrated his ignorance.

Not the first non-reader to be unaware of eminent domain buybacks and won't be the last.

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

The 5th was well-intentioned but ...

But what?

 

[Blue Crab]

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Eminent Domain in the Ohio Supreme Court



The trial court's idea that every buyback is always necessary by definition needs to be overruled.

Good news in Ohio.

Ohio Supreme Court Holds that Government Must Prove It Needs Land It Wants to Buyback Through Eminent Domain

...

The case decided today was brought by four farmers in Washington County. The farmers did not oppose all aspects of the easement application but did argue that the Ohio Power Company’s demands went well beyond what it needs in order to provide service. A lower court sided with the power company, essentially concluding that any request the company made could not be contested by property owners in court. The Ohio Supreme Court upheld an appeals court decision overturning the lower court and wrote that, “[A] blanket statement that all the easement terms are necessary, without findings to support that decision beyond the deference given to [the power company] makes us question whether the trial court did conduct the appropriate review.”

...

Well, that's about the most polite way I've ever seen a lower court told to do its fucking job next time.

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Reading Ohio's unanimous opinion this morning.

To resolve this case, we must determine the meaning of “appropriation” as that term is used in R.C. 163.09(B)(1). Ohio Power argues that the term “appropriation” must be interpreted broadly to mean the “project” or “taking” generally and that it does not include individual easement terms.

Pretty sure that "appropriation" means "buyback."

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Further on in the analysis, attributes of Ohio eminent domain laws are examined, including this:

if the property being appropriated is a blighted parcel that is being appropriated pursuant to a redevelopment plan, then the statement in the petition for appropriation must show the basis for the finding of blight and must support a finding that the parcel is a part of the blighted area

Not sure if you have to show that people are actually poor before buyingback their property, or if it would be enough to just show that the neighborhood is predominantly black.

 

[MR.CLEAN]

Not sure if you have to show that people are actually poor before buyingback their property, or if it would be enough to just show that the neighborhood is predominantly black.

neither. the fact that it got this far allows you to presume it. condemnation of rich wypipo property is exceedingly rare (mostly because their lawyers know exchange is a better remedy than FMV)

 

[jocal505]

Further on in the analysis, attributes of Ohio eminent domain laws are examined, including this:



Not sure if you have to show that people are actually poor before buyingback their property, or if it would be enough to just show that the neighborhood is predominantly black.

the race card again

race baiter alert #1 for 2023, in a pattern

RACEBAITER OF THE YEAR, 2015, Tom before Dogballs Ray

• March 24, 2015 (Tom Ray to random)...are you ever going to answer my question about AussieApartheid?
• March 24, 2015 (Tom Ray to random) Have you looked into solving AussieApartheid yet? Looks to me like your government is doing the same thing you denounce in ours.
• April 27, 2015 (Tom Ray to random) ...Have you fixed AussieApartheid yet? Seems like you have a lot of time for America's problems, so I assume you've fixed your own. How did you do it?
• May 8, 2015 (Tom Ray to random) ...what actions have you taken so far to eliminate AussieApartheid? Or are you all complaints about other countries, no action in your own?
• May 24, 2015 (Tom Ray to random) ...What have you done so far to stop AussieApartheid, random?
• June 17, 2015 Kelo Tom suspects "religious or political assassinations" when Dylann Roof does Charleston
• July 3, 2015 (Tom Ray to random) ...He already solved that nasty AussieApartheid so he's moved on to fixing our country. How'd you do it, random? @Goodvibes

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

the race card again

race baiter alert #1 for 2023, in a pattern

I didn't quote you at all, but am aware of your incessant need for attention, so here you go.

The immature, short-sighted desire for gunpower is amplified, and more volatile, among blacks. Even more deadly than among whites.

And Justice Thomas was right that the eminent domain abuses involving negro removal are almost that racist. It was nice when the Governor of California finally noticed that too.

 

[Mrleft8]

Yanno............. This thread is 12+ years old.
Tom Has never been to the city in the thread title, nor have 99.9% of the other posters on the thread.
This has gone way beyond beating a dead horse. This is now beating a dead horse's crumbling desiccated calcified remains.

 

[jocal505]

I didn't quote you at all, but am aware of your incessant need for attention, so here you go.


And Justice Thomas was right that the eminent domain abuses involving negro removal are almost that racist. It was nice when the Governor of California finally noticed that too.

This is getting fun now.

My dear Dogballs, if you insist on playing the race card in 2023, frequently, I will be expecting frequent racial insight in 2023.

(Tom to Mark K, March 26th 2015)
(Tom) I asked twice. I'll bold and highlight in red this time.
Does anyone want to guess at the reason Martin Luther King's concealed weapons permit was denied?
Any idea why his application for a CWP was denied? Even a wildass guess?
http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/in...olent-stuff-will-get-you-killed/&tab=comments>

Did you ever admit that MLK and Coretta passed on the gun permit idea? That he tossed his gun? Did you ever re-set on the anti-gun policy of the Alabama Southern Christian Leadership Conference? I must have missed your re-connection with the truth.



Dude, you can't help yourself. You play with a full deck of race cards, and so does your whole crowd. (Curiously, the Libertarian gun-law brief writers seem to like to play the race card. Eugene Volokh is a fine exception. Your Black Guns Matter bit has law briefs that come across just like Nanny Government Sucks: empty, in a basic way.)


Tom, how about you take all your racial crusading, and apply it directly to Citizen's United, a few times a week. Dark money tips the playing field against the impoverished, while you are giddy, and smarmy, while race-baiting.

Then apply the racial crusading to the present: we have dynamic, convoluted, developments in the gun mess. Black teens are now experiencing 20x the gun violence of white teens. It ain't no joke mate.

If you want to touch the wound, and fondle the injury, then become a healer.

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Yanno............. This thread is 12+ years old.
Tom Has never been to the city in the thread title, nor have 99.9% of the other posters on the thread.
This has gone way beyond beating a dead horse. This is now beating a dead horse's crumbling desiccated calcified remains.

Kelo vs New London still needs to be overturned.

Are you just mad because of the Kochy nutjobs' recent victory in Ohio?

Should I have started a new thread about it, even though we already have a perfectly good thread about eminent domain buybacks?

I can still do that, you know. I could be like most here and start a new thread every single time I have a thought instead of using an existing one. If you want to see a separate thread every time I post, just let me know and I'll consider changing my habits.

I won't reconsider whether Justice Thomas got the topic case right. He did. Negro removal was and is wrong, not a public use.

 

[jocal505]

Let's play DRED SCOTT'S REVENGE
35 results for Tom "dogballs" Ray

• 2019 sixteen Dreds/yr.
• 2018 thirteen Dreds/yr.
• 2017 three Dreds/yr.
• 2016 none
• 2015 none
• 2012 THE ORIGINAL One Dred

Corporations Are People
Plenipotentiary Tom replied to Plenipotentiary Tom's topic in Political Anarchy
...Dred Scott. We had to fight a war and pass a Constitutional amendment to overturn that precedent. Button is just more case law. Your argument is inductive but go back to your basis step. Dartmouth College v. Woodward. Case law. It gives Corporations the right of contract. I have no idea… April 14, 2012

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Yanno............. This thread is 12+ years old.
Tom Has never been to the city in the thread title, nor have 99.9% of the other posters on the thread.
This has gone way beyond beating a dead horse. This is now beating a dead horse's crumbling desiccated calcified remains.

Bruce's Beach was boughtback before there was an internet.

Should the family have just forgotten about it?

I'm glad they got the government to actually buy back the land that was boughtback. Even if someone thought a new thread about it was needed.

Bruce family to sell its Bruce's Beach property back to LA County for $20 million

"They (the Bruce family) feel what is best for them is selling this property back to the County for nearly $20 million and finally rebuilding the generational wealth they were denied for nearly a century. This is what reparations look like and it is a model that I hope governments across the...

www.cbsnews.com

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

@Olsonist will be along shortly to explain why his boy Shitstain was right to agree with Justice Stevens and why Justice Thomas was wrong about negro removal.

Why is this fun again?

 

[jocal505]

it isn't. i find much silliness...in a vacuum.

whew.