"The consciousness of good intentions disdains ambiguity. I shall not, however, multiply professions on this head. My motives must remain in the depository of my own breast. My arguments will be open to all, and may be judged of by all. They shall at least be offered in a spirit which will not disgrace the cause of truth."
-'Publius' The Federalist No. 1
What is amazing about the Kelo decision is that it has turned the political spectrum upside down. Conservatives are accusing liberals of being 'behind' the decision, with the same rhetoric emanating from liberals towards conservatives. Howard Dean's comments accusing the 'conservative' court of being behind the decision were highlighted here in this blog; however, it should be noted that all of the 'conservative' justices were in the dissent, so Mr. Dean was flat-out mistaken in his statement. This entire issue is amusingly similar to the old comedy bit 'Who's on First?' Though amusing may not be the most apt description when discussing the heart of the matter, the takings power. Illustrative of this national phenomenon is the accompanied editorial by Rich Lowry of National Review. Lowry discusses his recent interview of Representative Maxine Waters (D-Cal.). Known as a stalwart liberal in the House of Representatives, it is quite ironic to hear her and Milton Friedman discussed in the same light, expressing concern for property rights.
With all of the consternation involved; what can be and should be done to reverse this ominous Supreme Court precedent? Currently, it seems as though nothing is beginning to gain traction on a federal level. Many states, though, have begun the process of limiting the power of eminent domain as seen by the move Alabama made this past week marking it the first state to make such a move thus far. Unfortunately, this story and any other state activity seems to be flying under the radar.
What will become of this on a federal level, we shall only have to wait and see.