And the Cherry On Top

One can't help but notice how far we've come from the Lockean concept of natural rights, when not only can those rights be stripped, one can seemingly be punished for contesting the violation.

From the Fairfield County Weekly:

Those who believe in the adage "when it rains, it pours" might take the tale of the plaintiffs in Kelo v. New London as a cue to buy two of every animal and a load of wood from Home Depot. The U.S. Supreme Court recently found that the city's original seizure of private property was constitutional under the principal of eminent domain, and now New London is claiming that the affected homeowners were living on city land for the duration of the lawsuit and owe back rent. It's a new definition of chutzpah: Confiscate land and charge back rent for the years the owners fought confiscation.

In some cases, their debt could amount to hundreds of thousands of dollars. Moreover, the homeowners are being offered buyouts based on the market rate as it was in 2000 .

The hard rains started falling that year, when Matt Dery and his neighbors in Fort Trumbull learned that the city planned to replace their homes with a hotel, a conference center, offices and upscale housing that would complement the adjoining Pfizer Inc. research facility...

And, by now, of course, we all know how the story goes.

I suppose, for any municipality with an eye towards violating the rights of its constituents, there are two ways to accomplish that goal: 1. remove those rights from the law code in the first place, typically by inverting some brief and seemingly benign clause, or 2. make fighting for one's rights expensive enough to keep people from daring to try.

Evidently, the options are not mutually exclusive.

Complete story here.

Link from my friend, Jay Tamboli.