Good news and bad news from New Hampshire on the Kelo precedent

Today the Union Leader reported that a House committee is recommending that the state tighten its laws covering eminent domain seizures. They want to change the laws so that wherever it says “public purpose,” it now reads “public use,” and “public use” is defined as “the possession, occupation, and enjoyment of the land by the general public, or by public agencies.”

This would essentially keep people from taking private property for private development, such as was done in New London and sanctioned by the Supreme Court in the Kelo case. In my opinion, it’s appalling that it’s needed, but since the Supreme Court made such a wrong-headed decision, it’s the duty of the Several States to take their own actions to protect its citizens and their property.

On the down side, though, it could put a serious damper on that guy’s plans to take Justice David Souter’s Weare, NH home and build a hotel in its place. And that means that one guy is gonna have to pay a bundle to repaint his truck…

Insert Self-Promotion Here
A Nasty Hoax in the Heartland


  1. anon August 26, 2005
  2. Stephen Macklin August 26, 2005
  3. John Ryskmap August 26, 2005
  4. Stephen Macklin August 26, 2005
  5. Brad August 26, 2005
  6. K August 27, 2005
  7. Henry August 27, 2005