Y’all have no doubt heard about the Supreme Court’s decision to allow local governments to seize homes if it’s proven to be in the public’s interest. This is, as Thomas Fleming and Joesph Farah have pointed out, a trampling on a vital right, the right to land ownership. Essentially, this ruling takes the view that the government owns the land in practice, and can boot tenants out as it sees fit. While I generally don’t get all worked up over greedy businesses and what have you, it’s nonetheless obvious that unscrupulous persons with access to the right people could build any place they please regardless of who lives there already.

Justice John Paul Stevens cited the fifth amendment, which says that “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” Stevens, a good liberal, argues that “Promoting economic development is a traditional and long accepted function of government”. Stevens is using a very broad definition of public good, and while he’s obviously wrong it points to one of the problems with the Constitution – statements like this that can be broadly interpreted. Of course, people will twist words regardless so perhaps the problem lies not so much in the document as it does its readers.

How taking away a person’s property fits the public good is beyond me. One could argue that one is doing as much damage as good, but that’s not really the point. (With apologies to any Lockeans reading.) No, the point is that if you force someone to sell their land, what you’ve done is stolen it. That you paid for it was awfully considerate, but that doesn’t change the fact that it’s theft. Imagine I walked into some random person’s house, pointed a gun at their face and told them to sell me their TV for $200. They may be getting a good deal on the TV, but they were forced to sell it. I highly doubt that the police would deal with me as anything but a thief. The same principle applies writ large, even if five judges call it legal. Hopefully this will be overturned at some point. While I doubt we’ll see a rash of people losing their homes to greedy businessmen, it’s nonetheless a bad ruling that deserves to be overthrown. Oh, and impeaching some judges may be a good idea as well.