Eminent domain rears it's head again


A California city wants to seize land when the legal owner doesn't want to sell

Forget for a moment that one player in this piece is Wal-Mart.

Wal-Mart owns the land.

The company holds the title and does not wish to sell.

So the City Council threatens to seize the land, even though members of that same council have not read the latest proposal by Wal-Mart.

Why should the disposition of private property be subject to public approval?

Doesn't that mean that someone could only own property IF the City Council decided it was okay?

— NeoWayland

Posted: Sat - May 6, 2006 at 04:38 AM  Tag


 ◊  ◊   ◊  ◊ 

Random selections from NeoWayland's library



Pagan Vigil "Because LIBERTY demands more than just black or white"
© 2005 - 2009 All Rights Reserved