It's Friday afternoon, and we are afflicted with a bad case of Supreme Court fever! The rumor is that a whole host of important rulings (intellectual property, the ten commandments, cable TV) will come down Monday morning...and possibly the announcement of a resignation.

Bill Kristol says O'Connor, not Rehnquist, may be the one giving notice.

The Washington Times reports today on the headhunting committee (which includes one possible headhunt-ee, Alberto Gonzalez). Slate looks at the likely nominees.

Check out SCOTUSblog's visual breakdown of who voted how in cases this week.

Medill School of journalism has a great summary of this season's cases.

Feedback on yesterday's Kelo decision, which made it easier for governments to take away private property through eminent domain.

Kelo interpreted the U.S. Constitution's 5th Amendment. This decision does not affect the New York State's Constitutional restrictions on the exercising of the power of eminent domain. There would have to be a change, not only in State statute but probably also in the New York State Constitution to allow purely "economic condemnation" in New York, like that which occurred in New London.
-WB

A caller, Leonard, on Brian Lehrer’ Soapbox speaking about eminent domain, made an analogy regarding the acceptance, in this country, of taking property from the poor and giving it to the wealthy and the non-acceptance of the Cuban government taking property from the wealthy and giving it to the poor. What is left out of that analogy is that in this country eminent domain does call for “just compensation” and as far as I know, in Cuba no compensation is given.
-HL

Your guest said that any Eminent Domain taking would involve a "carefully considered development plan, considered by all the relevant city committees"

Not true. In the case of the proposed Ratner development, they will be bypassing all the relevant planning committees and the city altogether.
-SM

Feedback

Posted by leboheme at 03:00 PM