Kelo shouldn’t be Congress’ priority
ThoughIamaRepublicanwhoconsidersthe Supreme Court’s decision in Kelo v. New Londontobeegregious,Irespectfullydisagreewith the editorial “Pass the eminent domain bill.” (Editorials,Nov.27edition)Congressshouldattendtootherpriorities,suchaspassingtherest of the fiscal 2007 budget bills, during the limitedtimeavailableinthe109thCongress’lameduck session.
As I remember, in Kelo v. New London, the courtsaidthatstateandlocalgovernmentshave no constitutional barrier to exercising eminent domain in order to resell property taken for the purposeofurbanredevelopment.Thecourtdid notspecificallydirectthatthisbedone;itonlyde- niedtheplaintiffredressinthecourts.Stateand local governments around the country have been busy passing laws, including state constitutional amendments, to forbid use of eminent domain in this way.
Thisistheirright—indeed,theirduty,inmy opinion.LetCongressfocusontruenationalissues, not on what properly should be the purview of state governments. The Inhofe bill can be expected to resurface in the 110th Congress and can be addressed then if a national agenda allows time. David M. Hudelson Horse Shoe, North Carolina