further erosion of protections for average citizens under the bill of rights

the supreme court ruling that the concept of eminent domain under the fifth amendment now means that the government can force private citizens to sell their land or homes not just to advance the public interest --not just to build projects like roads , bridges, highways , railroads , subways and other public infrastructure, but the supreme court's new ruling means that federal state and local government may now also force private citizens to sell their houses , small businesses and land for non-public projects like privately owned office buildings, department stores and stripmalls .

so for the sake of extreme example , if wallmart , starbucks or mc donald's wants to build where your house is--- under this new supreme court interpretation , if your local government agrees with walmart , starbucks or mc donalds---then you can be forced to sell .

---the property owning poor are going to get slapped around by this---especially if they are like the black homeowners in the 80s and 90s --living on prime locations that the cities wanted to redevelop .

the black home owners living in key locations that were desired by big urban planning interests for re-development saw their property values rapidly plummet because of the crack cocaine epidemics and the dramatic increases in crime violence and destruction of economic and family life in their communities .

this plummeting in property values was followed up in some cases by big developers coming in and buying up black properties for pennies on the dollar ---the areas then were re-developed into yuppie economically upscale communities the original black families could no longer afford to live in --unless they had been paid full market value for their old homes .

in effect , this new supreme court decision means that a wealthy private company or wealthy private developer can finance a mayor's or city council member's election campaign , put into office candidates favorable to the developers plans and then use eminent domain to force homeowners to sell their properties to the city for use by the wealthy developer for their own private projects. .

this is basically , simply a transfer of little people's property into the hands of the wealthy for whatever projects the wealthy choose.

it wouldn't take much for the developers to figure out that the lower the appraisals given on the
houses or land they wish to acquire , the greater the final profit margin . once they gain control of the property appraisal process --if they haven't already --then they've got the whole game in their pocket.

the potential for abuse in this matter against the poor and middle classes is tremendously great.

in effect government becomes a transferring agent of little people's property to the wealthy .

--whether the little people want to sell or not , government has the go-ahead from the supreme court to force them to sell .


i heard yesterday that 97% of the citizen's from new london, conneticut who brought this case to the supreme court , trying to save their homes from a privately owned city development project , were black ...so we know the name of that tune .

in the 60s and 70s , historic black business districts in places like detroit were bought up by the city and state under the eminent domain principle. in detroit eminent domain was used in order to build a federal inter-state highway that was deliberately planned through the city's black business section --in part to get rid of successful black competition to larger mainstream businesses .

this new , much wider interpretation of eminent domain could easily be used against small and minority business owners by big corporations as well as being used against small home owners and small land owners to promote --"development"-- and in some cases of businesses , to eliminate competition .