If you have not heard by now, in the ruling in Kelo v. New London, the Supreme Court voted to allow Big Government to further wage war on the individual and the concept of individual property rights.

Liberals believe that our rights are given to us by the Imperial Federal Government, and can be taken away on a whim via a "living, breathing document" in the U.S. Constitution. So it should not surprise one that they also believe property is given to us by the Government, or more specifically, it allows us to have property and can be taken away on that same whim.

Our Constitution protects and guarantees us the rights with which we are born. They cannot, rather should not – in these times – be taken away by Government. However, the Government will try because that's how corrupted power maintains power: through the subjugation of the subjects.
Chalk another victory up for the Big Government advocates because now, thanks to the Supreme Beings, the individual has no right to his property. I do not like sounding clichéd, however, the deed a man holds in his hands is not worth the paper on which it is written. Literally.

If you own a piece of property that might be the ideal spot for a new hotel, Wal-Mart or strip mall, look out because you are in someone's crosshairs. If a developer would like to acquire your property, for any of the aforementioned developments, he no longer has to approach you directly to negotiate a fair price – which is usually a lot more expensive than he is willing to spend. Now, he can legally bypass that route and go directly to your Friendly Local Government and tell the authorities of his plan for a new store, reiterating the fact that said local government will generate more revenue through sales taxes than with property taxes the current owner would pay.

.
Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!

All the local government authorities need to hear is "more revenue" and they are sold. They can now rush out, seize your property against your will, compensate you with a "fair" price, then hand that property over to the developer. The developer doesn't have to pay as much for the land as he would have and the government will have more revenue. Everyone's happy!

Except for the individual property owner who just got raped.

Referring back to that time-tested piece of paper we call the Constitution, it says that eminent domain can be, and is only to be, used for public benefit. A Wal-Mart or a hotel is not a public benefit because they are private entities. So any action taken, under the guise of eminent domain, to benefit one private entity over another is highly unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court blew this one. Big time.