Monday, January 30, 2006

Apparently Sam Coppersmith has never heard of Kelo v. New London Development Corp.

Sam Coppersmith complains that legislators seeking restrictions on eminent domain abuse are wasting their time (and apparently that they are trying to create a diversion from other more important issues). Sure, Arizona has better protections in place than most states (as demonstrated by the decisions in Bailey v. Myers (link is a PDF) and City of Tempe v. Valentine) , but why is it any surprise that there is extensive support for expanding such protections in the aftermath of the Kelo decision? The failure of his column to even mention that decision strikes me as disingenuous.

The Castle Coalition and the Institute for Justice have very strong grassroots support on this issue, and it's not a partisan issue.

No comments: