Supreme Court paved way for possible Preakness condemnation with Kelo decision, delegate says
Del. Sandy Rosenberg, a Baltimore Democrat who teaches law, has an interesting observation about Gov. Martin O'Malley's plan to try to keep the Preakness Stakes in Baltimore through eminent domain, if necessary.
Such a strategy is only an option, Rosenberg writes in his legislative diary, because of the Supreme Court's controversial decision in the Kelo case that quickly became the ire of civil libertarians and others.
Here's what Rosenberg wrote:
If Susette Kelo had won her case in the Supreme Court four years ago, Governor O’Malley’s bill to save the Preakness could not have been introduced [Wednesday].Ms. Kelo challenged the constitutionality of the City of New London’s using the power of eminent domain to buy her home against her will.
The public purpose that prompted the City’s taking of her property was economic development.
Writing for a 5-4 majority, Justice Stevens held that the Court had a “longstanding policy of deference to legislative judgments” as to what should be considered a public purpose, where the state has formulated a plan that “it believes will provide appreciable benefits to the community.”
“Today the Court abandons…[a] long-held, basic limitation on government power,” said a dissenting Justice O’Connor. “Under the banner of economic development, all private property is now vulnerable to being given to an owner who will use it in a way that the legislature deems more beneficial to the public.”
House Bill 1578 would give the State the authority to exercise eminent domain to buy Pimlico Race Course and the Preakness Stakes. The Governor’s legislation declares that the race “has a very significant and positive economic development impact on Baltimore City and the State.”
When Ms. Kelo lost her case in 2005, if you had wagered that it would have an impact on the Preakness, you would have gotten great odds. And today, you would have collected your winnings.
Comments
The premise of Rosenberg's speculation is faulty.
He presumes the legislooters do not submit and pass bills that they know or believe to be unconstitutional.
See Wal Mart. Early voting. I believe there are a few more.
Posted by: Fed Up | April 9, 2009 7:58 PM
Since when do our legislators care about the constitution? They violate it time and again when they vote on bills they proclaim to be emergency legislation. Regardless of what the GA's lawyer Dan Friedman says, what they do just about every time they vote for bills they claim are emergency legislation, they are violating the constitution. By the way, Mr. Friedman wouldn't know proper Constitutional law if it beat him upside the head.
Posted by: David Kyle | April 10, 2009 12:25 AM
Many people were upset about the Kelo decision. I've always thought that what would be just would have been for the 5 Justices who voted in the majority of that decision to have their homes and property taken by eminent domain under the auspices of "economic development."
Whatever decision is made, let's just hope Pimlico and Preakness don't ultimately fall into the hands of either the Md. Jockey Club (or its owners) or Angelos. Let MJC just go away. And let Angelos focus on the Orioles.
Posted by: Jay | April 10, 2009 9:08 AM
Kelo and most em domain cases refer to physical property. The use of ED for intellectual property and non-tangible property has heretofore been limited to cases of national security.
Just imagine if the California government could take over Google, Inc calling it a tradition of California that propels the image of the state? What kind of message does that send to the business community? Successful enough and we'll forcefully take you over? Ouch.
Posted by: Jake | April 10, 2009 10:15 AM
Back in 1984, the legislature was contemplating eminent domain over the Baltimore Colts, and we know how that turned out. I guess Kelo is better than no SC case if the state is looking for authority for its position, but it seems to me that the Preakness is a personal intangible asset, as compared to the real tangible property that underlies the Kelo decision. I think we will all be better of if MD lets Magna handle this without government intervention.
Posted by: Paul | April 10, 2009 11:25 AM
If you want the entire issue totally screwed up, let the legislooters get involved and "fix" it.
Posted by: Fed Up | April 10, 2009 11:37 AM
The KELO decision should have little bearing on the theft of property this GA wants from Magna.
The bill SB1072 calls for the theft of ALL of Magnas property in Maryland including "(VI) ALL PROPERTY OF THE MARYLAND JOCKEY CLUB OF
BALTIMORE CITY, INC., OR ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, INCLUDING STOCK
AND EQUITY INTERESTS IN IT, AND INCLUDING ANY AND ALL PROPERTY OR
PROPERTY RIGHTS ASSOCIATED WITH IT, WHETHER TANGIBLE, INTANGIBLE,
REAL, PERSONAL, OR MIXED, AND ANY BUSINESS ENTITY THAT OWNS IT; AND
(VII) ALL PROPERTY OF THE LAUREL RACING ASSOCIATION,
INC., OR ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, INCLUDING STOCK AND EQUITY
INTERESTS, AND INCLUDING ANY AND ALL PROPERTY OR PROPERTY RIGHTS
ASSOCIATED WITH IT, WHETHER TANGIBLE, INTANGIBLE, REAL, PERSONAL, OR
MIXED, AND ANY BUSINESS ENTITY THAT OWNS IT."
This goes far beyond Kelo in its scope. This bill will be another found to be in disregard of the Md Constitution.
Posted by: Fed Up | April 10, 2009 2:27 PM
No goverment today respects the Constitution. Sandra Day O'Conner was right. The day Kelo was approved was the day no one who owned private property was save from the government. If we do not begin to take this back, we, our children, and grandchildren are doomed to servitude we fought against 200 years ago.
Posted by: AnneR | April 12, 2009 12:01 PM
No goverment today respects the Constitution. Sandra Day O'Conner was right. The day Kelo was approved was the day no one who owned private property was save from the government. If we do not begin to take this back, we, our children, and grandchildren are doomed to servitude we fought against 200 years ago.
Posted by: AnneR | April 12, 2009 12:01 PM