Property Rights

In June, 2005, the Supreme Court has ruled that state and local governments can take private property for the private economic development of the community and give this property to another private citizen to profit from.

According to Justice John Paul Stevens, the court has interpreted the words from the Constitution "public use" to include not only such traditional projects but also land redistribution. He concluded that a "public purpose" such as creating jobs in a depressed city can also satisfy the Fifth Amendment.

Does this sound fair?

During the last couple years, New London, Connecticut took the property of home owners and gave this property for a commercial complex. Some of these people had owned and lived on the property their whole lives. This was their home.

The home owners took their case to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the city of New London.

The government, specifically the Supreme Court, is expanding the Constitution from what the "Founding Fathers" would have interpreted from their words. The "Founding Fathers' did not intend for private property to be taken and given to other individuals to profit from.

We hope to amend the Constitution to insure that any taking of private property is for public use and remains in the ownership of the local, State, or federal government.

See our Lists of Amendments.