tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17908317.post115913534050284140..comments2024-03-15T20:20:47.934-07:00Comments on Unenumerated: Why Kelo was way offNick Szabohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16820399856274245684noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17908317.post-58817335626842720812007-08-26T07:04:00.000-07:002007-08-26T07:04:00.000-07:00Very interesting information, thank you! I've got ...Very interesting information, thank you! I've got a blog with <A HREF="http://channelbf.com" REL="nofollow">business franchise information</A>. Maybe you will also find something interesting for you there.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17908317.post-1159160153303160812006-09-24T21:55:00.000-07:002006-09-24T21:55:00.000-07:00My own opinion is that "from A to B" is a restrict...My own opinion is that "from A to B" is a restriction under the Due Process Clause. This is because this was, along with a number of procedural rights, a canonical example of something that would violate the Law of the Land Clause of the Magna Carta, from which the Due Process Clause derives. <BR/><BR/>But the Takings Clause and the Due Process Clause are all part of the same sentence in the 5th Amendment, and the Takings Clause applies to the states via the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, so your interpretation may be practically as good.Nick Szabohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16820399856274245684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17908317.post-1159159528198071112006-09-24T21:45:00.000-07:002006-09-24T21:45:00.000-07:00It could be both; that is, you can't take from A t...It could be both; that is, you can't take from A to give to B, and your can't take from A to give to a government unless said property is to be used for a coercive role of government or for a natural monopoly like a road.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com