Submitted by Michael Belgrove, Jan 11, 2007 08:01

The Kelo decision is actually nothing but the logical consequence of a much earlier decision: Kohl v. U.S. (1875), where the court, through rambling and inconsistent arguments, tried to enshrine eminent domain as a government power. Mr. Berliner and the Institute for Justice apparently have no problem with the Kohl decision.
However, the simple fact is that there is NO express warrant for eminent domain at all in the U.S. constitution. The only mention of it is in the 5th amendment, which is part of a list of individual rights, not a way to infer new government powers not granted elsewhere.

It very naive to assume that eminent domain may be employed for a "legitimate public use", as defined by the government, and suppose that this power will not be abused. The only "just compensation" that there can ever be for a piece of property is an amount freely agreed to in advance by both buyer and seller. The real goal should be overturning Kohl vs. U.S.

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.