Hightower Lowdown

Something downright spooky is happening to me: I find myself agreeing with Clarence Thomas!

In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court has ruled that state and local governments may now use their power of eminent domain to seize someone's home or business and hand it over to private developers. Specifically, the majority said that the city of New London, Connecticut, was within its rights to take 15 homes from residents in an old waterfront neighborhood so a corporation can build offices, a hotel, and upscale apartments in their place.

In his dissent, Thomas said, "The Court has erased the public use clause from our constitution." I agree. This clause allows private property to be taken by the government only for public uses, such as building public roads, parks, schools, etc. But the Court's majority has now stretched this clause beyond recognition by ruling that the seizure is OK as long as there's a public purpose involved. In the Connecticut case, the purpose was to get more property taxes for the city by replacing the individual homes with a large-scale, ritzy development. In plain words, government officials have just been cleared to turn over your property to companies that'll pay more in taxes.

Bizarrely, it's the so-called "liberals" on the Court who voted for this theft, and it was Thomas, Scalia, Rehnquist, and O'Connor who nixed it. As O'Connor noted in her blistering dissent, those who'll profit from this plutocratic ruling will be "those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations."

I'm with her. And for the Court's clueless liberals, I propose that they pop a populist pill every morning to help them see the difference between the people's interest…and corporate interests.