Supreme Co-Tyrant Justice John Paul Stevens writes (link dead):

“The city has carefully formulated an economic development that it believes will provide appreciable benefits to the community, including — but by no means limited to — new jobs and increased tax revenue,” Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the majority.

So What?

The question was, “Can cities take property and give them to developers?” The answer lay in the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. (emphasis mine)

Giving property to developers is not public use! The developers do what they see fit with the property, with the lure that it will be “good for the area”! Who has that kind of prognosticative ability?

It is never the Supreme Court’s job to write legislation via their vaunted opinions, nor is it their job to supersede what is plainly written in the Constitution. If we cannot count on the rights guaranteed by that document, we have no Constitution.

If we don’t Article III this right out of the Supremes’ jurisdiction or we don’t impeach these judges who can’t read a document fit for high schoolers, we are absolutely done. Why should I strive to own property when anybody can take it from me on a whim? What prevents these government entities from taking over any industry they feel like? HillaryCare? Screw that, we’ll take the hospital.

Time to buy stock in headache medicines. But then, any government agency can take that too now.

Michelle Malkin has more.