Comments by "SmallSpoonBrigade" (@SmallSpoonBrigade) on "Sup Ct Asked to Overturn One of Its WORST Decisions of All time" video.

IKR, there have been so many bad decisions in recent decades that it's require a lot more specificity. But, I definitely agree that this does qualify. It was ridiculous for the government to be able to seize property to give to a private company.
2
The fact that I see so many people in the comment section saying things along those lines is an absolutely damning indictment of how incompetent and corrupt the court has gotten.
2
Yes, virtually everything the government does is a potential public good. But, that does not mean that everything the government owns is for public use. You'd have a lot of legal problems if you tried to invoke public use at a military installation or in the back rooms of a police station.
1
Just keep in mind that the only demographic that actually mattered was in favor of it. The people bribing the court.
1
It won't happen, you'll get at least one of the more corrupt members of the court to vote to sustain it on purely technical grounds that display a shocking lack of intellectual capacity to understand the connection between these decisions and the world around them.
1
@SamClemens-d5n Stare decisis is in theory not a major problem. The issue is when you get corrupt judges making bad rulings and then refusing to fix the mistake because they don't want to up end things. Some decisions are so bad and conflict with any reasonable reading of the constitution that people should expect a fix. Things like Gore v. Bush where the court had absolutely no business stopping the counting and it wound up resulting in the wrong candidate taking office. Even at the time, they knew it was iffy and didn't want it to be considered precedence, but in 2004 it was used again.
1
@dlengelkes That's a non-starter, there's a bunch of stuff that can't happen if there is no eminent domain. For example, there are a bunch of light rail projects going on around the US right now, those are expensive enough without having to contend with people setting ludicrous prices on the property that the project needs knowing that nobody can force them to give it up.
1