Private property rights are the bedrock of American liberties – the cornerstone of a free society. The latest U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Kelo v. City of New London, Connecticut, demolishes that cornerstone by severely blurring the line between what is yours and what is government’s. 

Prior to the ruling, we saw examples all over the nation of municipalities from New London to San Diego, California, seizing private property to put toward what those cities deemed “better use.”  

Don’t get me wrong, zoning laws are an important part of the community planning process. After all, a pig farm has no place in the middle of a housing development. But since when is it up to the government to determine what is a better use than your existing property use? 

In her dissenting opinion, retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor quoted Justice Chase, who, in 1798, immediately following the ratification of the Constitution’s Bill of Rights, wrote, “(A) law that takes property from ‘A’ and gives it to ‘B’: It is against all reason and justice, for a people to entrust a Legislature with SUCH powers.”  

In my estimation, this vividly sums up the intent of our founding fathers, which proves to me that today’s U.S. Supreme Court is hardly interpreting the Constitution, but rather setting policy, which is solely to be left to the legislative branch of government. 

O’Connor also put her own spin on the ruling when she said that cities should not have unlimited authority to uproot families, even if they are provided compensation, simply to accommodate wealthy developers. She went on to argue that any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, and that beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms. 

Imagine – a rich developer works a backdoor deal with your city council to build a stripmall over your neighborhood without consulting you or your neighbors. The only notice you have been given is to vacate the premises by a date certain. Forget that you have conscientiously paid your inflated property tax bill for years. And you can take or leave the so-called fair market compensation offered by your city. 

That hardly sounds like a free society. In fact, it sounds more to me like the People’s Republic of China. Unfortunately, the ruling by the Supreme Court has opened up the floodgates, and instances like this have already begun to happen in other parts of the country. 

According to a July 3 article in the San Diego Union-Tribune, two days after the ruling, the president of the Boston City Council called on his mayor to seize waterfront property from unwilling sellers for a private development project. The city of Arnold, Missouri, proposes to flatten 30 homes and 15 small businesses for a large home improvement store and stripmall for which the developer is to receive $21 million in tax benefits from the city. 

It is only a matter of time before these sorts of things begin to happen in your neighborhood. Now is the time to sit up and take notice. I will need your help to pass a law that forbids this type of property theft from the citizens by their government. 

-end-