🌟 Exclusive 2024 Prime Day Deals! 🌟

Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁

How do you feel about this?

Wry Catcher

Diamond Member
Aug 3, 2009
51,322
6,470
1,860
San Francisco Bay Area
The Nebraska Supreme Court let stand a 2012 state law that allows the governor to empower Calgary-based TransCanada to force eastern Nebraska landowners to sell their property for the project.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/20...pass-pipeline.html#.VLBEqdLF_WQ#storylink=cpy

Well now, how do you feel about this decision? A court allows a foreign company to force American Citizens to sell their land.
 
The Nebraska Supreme Court let stand a 2012 state law that allows the governor to empower Calgary-based TransCanada to force eastern Nebraska landowners to sell their property for the project.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/20...pass-pipeline.html#.VLBEqdLF_WQ#storylink=cpy

Well now, how do you feel about this decision? A court allows a foreign company to force American Citizens to sell their land.
Those who truly respect Private Property will have one answer. The rest will have another.
 
Money wins over private property rights.

Its criminal.

But really, is anyone surprised?
 
Money wins over private property rights.

Its criminal.

But really, is anyone surprised?
You mean like that Liberal State that took Imminent Domain to the Supreme Court to force a man to sell his land because the State could sell it to a private investor and get more tax money out of it? Like that? Or was that different?
 
The Nebraska Supreme Court let stand a 2012 state law that allows the governor to empower Calgary-based TransCanada to force eastern Nebraska landowners to sell their property for the project.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/20...pass-pipeline.html#.VLBEqdLF_WQ#storylink=cpy

Well now, how do you feel about this decision? A court allows a foreign company to force American Citizens to sell their land.
You understand you mischaracterized the law, right? Let's start with that. If you can admit we can have a reasonable discussion. If you can't admit that then it's pretty much a non-starter.
 
The Nebraska Supreme Court let stand a 2012 state law that allows the governor to empower Calgary-based TransCanada to force eastern Nebraska landowners to sell their property for the project.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/20...pass-pipeline.html#.VLBEqdLF_WQ#storylink=cpy

Well now, how do you feel about this decision? A court allows a foreign company to force American Citizens to sell their land.
You understand you mischaracterized the law, right? Let's start with that. If you can admit we can have a reasonable discussion. If you can't admit that then it's pretty much a non-starter.
I'm with the Jew....
 
Money wins over private property rights.

Its criminal.

But really, is anyone surprised?
You mean like that Liberal State that took Imminent Domain to the Supreme Court to force a man to sell his land because the State could sell it to a private investor and get more tax money out of it? Like that? Or was that different?

I mean exactly that. Private property must not be appropriated for the use of another private enterprise (business operation).
 
The same as I do when eminent domain is used by our government I don't like it.

Eminent domain is a different issue.
Not in the case I was talking about, The city ( might have been the State) took a man's property by eminent Domain for the sole purpose of selling it to an investor that promised them a higher tax base. And the Liberals in the Supreme Court agreed it was legal and the only recourse was for States to change their laws.
 
The Nebraska Supreme Court let stand a 2012 state law that allows the governor to empower Calgary-based TransCanada to force eastern Nebraska landowners to sell their property for the project.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/20...pass-pipeline.html#.VLBEqdLF_WQ#storylink=cpy

Well now, how do you feel about this decision? A court allows a foreign company to force American Citizens to sell their land.
You understand you mischaracterized the law, right? Let's start with that. If you can admit we can have a reasonable discussion. If you can't admit that then it's pretty much a non-starter.

If I did, it was not intentional. You however have provided nothing as evidence that I misrepresented anything. Post your evidence! Or prove once again how dishonest you are.

Mine evidence is in the link I posted above.
 
The same as I do when eminent domain is used by our government I don't like it.

Eminent domain is a different issue.
Not in the case I was talking about, The city ( might have been the State) took a man's property by eminent Domain for the sole purpose of selling it to an investor that promised them a higher tax base. And the Liberals in the Supreme Court agreed it was legal and the only recourse was for States to change their laws.

Eminent domain is the right of a government or its agent to expropriate private property for public use, with payment of compensation
 
The same as I do when eminent domain is used by our government I don't like it.

Eminent domain is a different issue.
Not in the case I was talking about, The city ( might have been the State) took a man's property by eminent Domain for the sole purpose of selling it to an investor that promised them a higher tax base. And the Liberals in the Supreme Court agreed it was legal and the only recourse was for States to change their laws.

Eminent domain is the right of a government or its agent to expropriate private property for public use, with payment of compensation
And yet the Supreme Court of the United States agreed 5 to 4 that City had the right to use eminent domain to take a persons property for the sole purpose of selling it an investor that promised a higher tax base.
 
a court giving American taxpayer land to a French-Canadian foreign country FREE of charge pisses me off ... RW's love it, then call themselves Patriots.

F Canada, the court and the RW's.

end of story.
 
The same as I do when eminent domain is used by our government I don't like it.

Eminent domain is a different issue.
Not in the case I was talking about, The city ( might have been the State) took a man's property by eminent Domain for the sole purpose of selling it to an investor that promised them a higher tax base. And the Liberals in the Supreme Court agreed it was legal and the only recourse was for States to change their laws.

Eminent domain is the right of a government or its agent to expropriate private property for public use, with payment of compensation
And yet the Supreme Court of the United States agreed 5 to 4 that City had the right to use eminent domain to take a persons property for the sole purpose of selling it an investor that promised a higher tax base.

They made a number of decisions on 5-4 votes - does that tell you anything? But as usual you avoided the issue, see the phrase I posted in blue?
 
The Nebraska Supreme Court let stand a 2012 state law that allows the governor to empower Calgary-based TransCanada to force eastern Nebraska landowners to sell their property for the project.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/20...pass-pipeline.html#.VLBEqdLF_WQ#storylink=cpy

Well now, how do you feel about this decision? A court allows a foreign company to force American Citizens to sell their land.

Fifty-Four Forty or Fight!

Sadly, the usual morons on the far right have not a clue what your post means.
 

Forum List

Back
Top