Delicious!
Posted by Ray @ 12:01 pmA spate of recent US Supreme Court rulings have set the ‘net community abuzz. But the SCOTUS’ decision on Grokster v. MGM aside, there’s another ruling [Kelo v. City of New London - warning: PDF of the judgment!] that allows city governments to take privately owned land and give it to another private entity, if doing so will benefit the government.
(A brief, shallow digression into the law - the case involved the government’s power to seize privately-owned land for its own purposes. In the US it’s called “eminent domain”; Singaporeans may be more familiar with the term “compulsory purchase” of land. Whatever the case, it is generally accepted that it’s okay for the government to take land for its own purposes/public purposes/beneficial purposes. But in a 5-4 bare majority ruling, the SCOTUS held that eminent domain is also applicable for private development.)
Now, in a daring, absolutely hilarious move that everyone should have seen coming, a private developer is seeking to use this new ruling on eminent domain to build a hotel on SCOTUS Justice David H. Souter’s land (he was one of the judges who voted to allow eminent domain to be used in this manner).
To add insult to injury, the proposed development is called “The Lost Liberty Hotel”, and will have a cafe named the “Just Desserts Café” (!).
Best of all, should the Town Council vote yes, it will be utterly and completely legal.
This is the stuff I love waking up to in the mornings =).
2 Comments »
The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://www.squarebrain.net/2005-06/delicious/trackback/
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
not compulsory purchase, but compulsory acquisition, haha.
land acquisition act mah.
Comment by a l — Thursday, June 30 2005 @ 5:53 pm
*sniggers*
(Because I’m humji, I’d like to state for the record that “a l”’s opinions are entirely his own, and I’m only laughing because it’s funny.)
Comment by Ray — Monday, July 4 2005 @ 11:38 pm