Eminent domain according to the US Constitution is taking private land for PUBLIC use. What the SC did, under the guise of "economic development" companies formed by the government, was taking private land and giving it to PRIVATE developers. That my friend, is not in the Constitution and is in direct conflict with it. What makes it socialism is, this very same thing is happening in Communist China right now. They are throwing people out of their homes to develop PRIVATE businesses. Same thing here. That's why Bush issued the order. You think he would issue an executive order going against something that is DIRECTLY ALLOWED in the Constitution? Legislatures from around the country are creating and passing laws against the SC ruling. Is that against US law? NO!
Then you should have said that SC is for socialism, not red is for socialism. In either case it is not correct. Eminent domain is NOT socialism. Look it up. I never mentioned cities taking land and giving it to private developers to increase taxes. I said cities should only take land for the public benefit of renovating blighted areas. I also said that the profits resulting from the development should be shared with the property owners, not just split between the city and the redevelopers. That ain't socialism either.
Interesting. However, the same justices that voted in favor of the taking of private property by cities for private purposes are still on the bench. It is doubtful that they will change their opinion. Both Day and Reinquest voted in the minority, so in regards to this issue, the composition of the court has not changed.
