“On March 24, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States declined to take up the case of Bowers Development, LLC. v. Oneida County Industrial Development Agency Et. Al.,” writes Conner Drigotas, “a decision that allows the practice of legalized theft through eminent domain to continue throughout America.”
This is not good news, as Mr. Drigotas explains. “In that case, Bryan Bowers had asked the Justices to review a ruling from the Supreme Court of New York that allowed Utica city officials to take land on which he had a contract to build and give it to a different private corporation for a separate construction project.” Mr. Bowers had “hoped to stop government officials from using force to pick winners and losers in the construction industry.” But it was a no go.
Politicians and bureaucrats love to grab other people’s property, under cover of “the public interest.” But their “public interest” is nothing more than a thin disguise for helping some individuals (often contributors to politicians’ campaigns) at the expense of others.
“With their denial of Bowers, Justices continued to show support for one of the most hated and notorious decisions to come out of their lofty chambers: that of Susette Kelo v. New London, Connecticut,” explains Drigotas. The Kelo case, often mentioned here, remains the ruling precedent, the government’s license to steal. Its loose construction of what can be regarded as in “the public interest” is a big part of the problem.
Sadly, the courts have so far refused to rein in government eminent domain abuse. And voters have little sway upon the judiciary. And our representatives, our first line of defense, have also declined to stand up for basic justice and decency.
What to do? Remember that your representatives will soon be on the ballot.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Illustration created with Krea and Firefly
See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts
2 replies on “The Stealing Goes On”
That some Justice wants to overturn Kelo is a good bet. After all, it was decided only five-to-four, and one of the four (Thomas) is still on the Court. But four or more Justices must agree to hear a case for it to be argued before the Court. And, unfortunately, in deciding which cases to decide, most or all of the Justices use a calculus that sacrifices some parties in order to find cases most suitable to charting the course of law; so, even if a majority of Justices want to overturn Kelo, they may be biding their time, thinking that a better case than that of Mr. Bowers will come-along. Quite possibly, Bowers would not have required as broad a ruling as a majority wish to deliver.
Citizens actually do have sway over the judiciary, through the lesser magistrates provided for in the Constitution. Specifically, through citizen-run grand juries. These were included in founding plan specifically to address issues created by politicians that violated their oath of office and judges that ruled with a partisan bent. So effective and so threatening to the bureaucratic class and the corrupt that they have moved mountains to isolate it from actual citizen input. It remains a vestige of its original purpose, still effective but able to be reigned and pointed or even gelded by the flavor-of-the-day and bought district attorneys. A perfect example is the state level AG here in Georgia, who has done zero about the flagrant felony violation by Fulton county in the 2020 elections. The Secretary of State’s picked minions oversaw that the State Election Board did no more than a letter of reprimand for the 42 felony violations of Georgia Election Law by Fulton County election administrators in 2020 and our State AG didn’t say “boo”. A constitutional-based citizen run grand jury should have been able to step in and address this.