Dangerous Precedent

Dangerous Precedent?

Hoi B. Tran

The recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Kelo v. City of New London, Conn., has made millions of Americans outrageously furious. I am one of those furious Americans. Not only I am furious, I also have a serious dread about this possible Eminent Domain abuse. And here is the basis of my fear.

Thirty years ago, along with hundreds of thousands of other Vietnamese, I left Vietnam and came to this country as a refugee in fear of communism and its tyrannical regime. Leaving with such short notice, most of us had to leave everything behind. I came to America with my empty hands and pockets, leaving in Vietnam my real estate property and two cars (all paid for), and also my lifetime savings. But I have had no regret of my decision. Because if I had not left Vietnam in April 1975, I would have been cruelly persecuted and all my assets would have been automatically seized by the dictatorial government anyway!

Coming to America at the age of 40, I was afforded the most precious things; Liberty, Freedom and also an opportunity to rebuild my life. After 28 years of continuous hard working, I have been able to achieve the American dream, the proud ownership of a house. As a citizen of a most civilized country on the planet, I have been so happy and grateful to have chosen America to live the balance of my life. I have been religiously under the belief that this country was founded on the principle that its citizenry has the constitutional rights to pursue happiness, to protect their lives, their properties and their liberty. But now, at the age of 70, I just learned something which worries not only me but, undoubtedly, millions of Americans across our country. It was the 5/4 ruling by the Supreme Court on June 23, 2005 ⁽¹⁾ which gave local government much broader authority to seize, confiscate private property, or even an entire community, for the benefit of private developers and big corporations. The current victims of this unpopular ruling are the unfortunate people of New London, Connecticut. And, the future victims may very well be you and me.

According to the Institute for Justice ⁽²⁾ in Washington D.C., subsequent to the Supreme Court ruling, some local governments in various States have began legal filings to seize small businesses to make way for others. And at this juncture, fortunately, only five States (Kansas, Maryland, Minnesota, New York and North Dakota) have said the Kelo ruling is acceptable to their State Constitutions. Nine States have disagreed and other States have not clearly expressed their position on this issue. Nevertheless, this is a good wake up call for everyone. I believe it is time for all of us, whether you are from the left or the right, libertarians or independents, or you are in between, to begin thinking about this serious matter.

I wish to make one thing absolutely clear when writing this; I do not claim to be knowledgeable about Constitutional law. I merely raise this question as an issue to be concerned for those who share the same concern. It is my understanding that the framers of the Constitution wanted to see a delicate balance between the three branches of the government. The executive, legislative and judicial power, each branch exists to hold the others in check and preserve the republic. Our founding fathers certainly do not want to see one branch to usurp the power of the other two branches to become a self-legislating body? But in reality, it appears the Supreme Court, with their biased, liberal interpretations, has been slowly usurping the power of the elected authorities and going against the will of the people.

Under communist government, high-ranking cadres, having the blessings of the Party, become so powerful that they could do almost anything they want. There are no checks and balances on these untouchables! In the wake of the recent Supreme Court decision on Kelo v. City of New London, Conn, I have the impression that, if we stay passively submissive, these Supreme Court Justices may be becoming the untouchables of America. I have some concerns on the power of the Supreme Court Justices over the Constitutional Rights of the People. Can we afford to allow the perennially human propensity for abusing power to carve crevices in the constitutional language to open the door for despotism? Do we have any recourse ⁽³⁾ over the abuse of Eminent Domain? Do we, the people, have any Constitutional right to prevent the Supreme Court Justices to legislate from the bench? I believe my above concerns are not out of line. I believe they are legitimate concerns. Will someone knowledgeable about Eminent Domain and the Constitution help shed some lights on the above issues and concerns?

⁽¹⁾ The five Supreme Court Justices voted in favor of the City of New London are:

Justices John P. Stevens, Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

⁽²⁾ Institutefor Justice website: http://www.ij.org

⁽³⁾ Movements against Eminent Domain abuse: http://www.castlecoalition.org/HandsOffMyHome/