[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 11]
[House]
[Page 14524]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




       ON SUPREME COURT RULING REGARDING PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of 
January 4, 2005, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert) is recognized 
during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, in ancient days of kingdoms and fiefdoms, 
those in authority would sometimes arbitrarily and sometimes 
capriciously order the transfer of property from one owner to another 
person who was in greater favor with the ruler at that particular 
moment. The owner from whom the property was taken had no recourse once 
the king or ruler had made the decision to transfer the property. To 
back up the transfer, the tyrannical despot would make clear that the 
full weight of his military or local law enforcement could be brought 
to bear against anyone who attempted to stand in the way of the 
transfer.
  In the recent Supreme Court case of Kelo et al. v. City of New London 
et al., the elaborate 20-page majority opinion of the United States 
Supreme Court is one of the most eloquent, articulate, intellectual 
efforts to ever rationalize or try to cerebrally legitimize the forced 
transfer from the legal, legitimate owner of nonblighted property to 
someone who is in greater favor with the ruler of that area. It is 
something that our high court can point to with pride that they almost 
make it sound fair that private property can be taken from one 
legitimate owner and forcibly transferred to one who offers greater 
financial rewards to the ruler of that area.
  What a great day for the intellectual superiority of the highest 
court of the land as it gets a 10 rating in the field of mental 
gymnastics, even from the Russian judge. But what a very, very sad day 
for truth, justice and what used to be the American way.

                          ____________________