Rape of the Fifth Amendment

Ask Susette Kelo of New London, Connecticut about the right to own property: The Supreme Court decided, 5 to4, this past July (# 04-108: Kelo vs. The City of New London, CT) that her home didn't belong to her after all, but rather to a private developer who coveted it.

For those who don't know the background yet, here it is (adapted from the Institute for Justice website):

Susette Kelo dreamed of owning a home that looked out over the water. She purchased and lovingly restored her little pink house where the Thames River meets the Long Island Sound in 1997, and has enjoyed the great view from its windows ever since. The Dery family, down the street from Susette, has lived in Fort Trumbull since 1895; Matt Dery and his family live next door to his mother and father, whose parents purchased their house when William McKinley was president. The richness and vibrancy of this neighborhood reflects the American ideal of community and the dream of home ownership.

Tragically, the City of New London is turning that dream into a nightmare.In 1998, pharmaceutical giant Pfizer built a plant next to Fort Trumbull and the City determined that someone else could make better use of the land than the Fort Trumbull residents. The City handed over its power of eminent domain—the ability to take private property for public use [as provided in the Fifth Amendment]—to the New London Development Corporation (NLDC), a private body, to take the entire neighborhood for private development[and thus to increase the city's tax base].

As the Fort Trumbull neighbors found out, when private entities wield government’s awesome power of eminent domain and can justify taking property with the nebulous claim of “economic development,” all homeowners are in trouble.

[The Supreme Court handed over the Fifth Amendment's "eminent domain" power to the private sector. Did not the SCOTUS alter the Bill of Rights in a fundamental way?]

A few observations after my attempt to stir the interest of friends, acquaintances, and professional organizations:

• Surprisingly, only a tiny minority of citizens--persistent critics, libertarians, and a few independents--reacted immediately to the SCOTUS decision with petitions and letters.
• Some, after being briefed on the ruling's undermining the eminent domain provisions of the Fifth Amendment, merely shrugged and moved on to "more important" things.
• Some even criticized me for proselytizing them with e-mails.
• Some remained silent, believing their protest might land them on "someone's list."
• Some even called us dissenters "fanatics."

But if the above doesn't get your juices flowing, perhaps the following blogger blurb (if true) sent by a friend this morning, might make you squirm a little:

And now the politicians, who run. . . the City of New London, are charging the victims . . . "back rent" for daring to continue to occupy their own property during the time when their case wound its way to the Supreme Court.

So where do you stand? Is this an issue worth your energy to learn more about? Are those of us who are outraged really on the lunatic fringe--too far out of the mainstream for your comfort? For the curious, you can logon to one of many websites that are active in opposing the Kelo decision (including the National Association of Realtors--surprisingly); here's a libertarian site that sponsored a petition, "Impeach the Justices," that was posted in July and August, and is being delivered to a member of Congress this week.