GOVEROTRAGEOUS: The Gooferment is the judge, jury, and executioner when it misbehaves

Sunday, November 5, 2023

https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4192662/posts

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/restoring-america/fairness-justice/a-texas-farmers-fight-for-justice-could-have-major-implications-for-property-rights

A Texas farmer’s fight for justice could have major implications for property rights
By Jon Miltimore  — October 26, 2023 09:44 AM

*** begin quote ***

In the 1930s, Richie DeVillier’s grandfather purchased a farm in Winnie, a little town in eastern Texas named after a railroad contractor who prospered.

For nearly a century, the DeVillier family raised cattle and grew crops on the 900-acre property without incident — until the Texas Department of Transportation started a highway project that had serious implications for DeVillier’s land.

In the early 2000s, the state renovated Interstate 10, elevating and broadening the highway and erecting concrete barriers. The construction trapped the DeVillier property, turning his farm into a lake whenever the region experienced heavy rains, as it did in 2017 during Hurricane Harvey.

“The water started to rise on August 28,” DeVillier recalled . “Our home was completely flooded by August 29.”

When DeVillier says his “home,” he’s not talking about just his house. Video footage shows his entire farm submerged, with cows standing chest-deep in water; fields where the family once grew rice and olives can be seen totally flooded.

*** and ***

In November, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit punted on the matter, arguing that federal courts have no jurisdiction in takings cases against states. (A “taking” isn’t necessarily seizing the property; an action that substantially alters a property is legally defined as a taking in tort law.)

The court didn’t rule against DeVillier. It simply said that Congress never passed a law allowing Americans to sue states for taking their property, so the Fifth Amendment’s property protections do not apply to DeVillier or anyone else.

The court’s reasoning is strange. Not only does the Constitution explicitly state that no person shall be “deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law … [or] without just compensation,” but the high court weighed in on this issue as recently as 2019.

*** and ***

“If there is one basic principle in property law, it’s the Pottery Barn Rule: You break it, you buy it,” said Robert McNamara, an attorney for the Institute for Justice who is representing the family. “The Fifth Circuit’s decision in this case amounts to ‘you pay if you feel like it.’”

*** and ***

That the government, which was created to secure these rights, has become the single greatest transgressor of human rights is a sad irony, one that was not lost on the 19th-century economist Frederic Bastiat, who described it as a “perversion.”

Few know this better than Richie DeVillier, whom the state of Texas is trying to stiff after destroying his farm.

Fortunately, the Supreme Court has a chance to make amends. If it does, it will not just be a win for DeVillier. It will be a win for justice.

*** end quote *** 

I like that summation  — the Pottery Barn Rule.  In this case, the Gooferment “robbed this family blind”!

—30—


POLITICAL: Crony Capitalism meets Regulatory Capture

Thursday, September 25, 2014

http://www.cato.org/blog/california-gives-inspectors-new-power-menaces-more-unlicensed-contractors-jail

SEPTEMBER 19, 2014 11:36AM
State Inspectors Get Run Of California Worksites—At Business Groups’ Behest
By WALTER OLSON

*** begin quote ***

How could the California legislature have unanimously (as it did) passed a measure curtailing property rights by giving more state inspectors access to places of labor against owners’ will? Simple: it was framed as a pro-business measure. Among its backers were the sponsoring Contractors State License Board and such groups as the Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Contractors Association, the electrical contractors, the landscape contractors, the plumbing and heating contractors, and so forth. 

*** end quote ***

Crony Capitalism meets Regulatory Capture!

It’s all about reducing competition.

That’s the first rule of Crony Capitalism: payoff the politicians and bureaucrats and keep competition out of the marketplace. 

Argh!

Maybe it’s just me.

# – # – # – # – #    


GOVEROTRAGEOUS: Fifth Amendment violation by “permits

Thursday, October 18, 2012

http://www.wnd.com/2012/10/landowner-stands-ground-against-government-shake-down/?cat_orig=politics

WND EXCLUSIVE
Landowner stands ground against government ‘shake-down’
Supremes agree to decide how much regulators can require
Published: 13 October 2012
by Bob Unru

*** begin quote ***

“But regulators saw a chance to pounce and make all kinds of costly, unrelated, outrageous demands,” he said. “Without any justification, the government demanded money, labor and resources as the price for allowing the Koontzes to use their own land.

“This was a flat-out shakedown, a form of extortion,” he said.

Family members had tried for years to develop the land, but the local St. Johns River Water Management District would not issue the necessary permits, “because Koontz would not agree to costly and unjustified conditions that the district imposed.”

“Specifically, the district demanded that Koontz dedicate his money and labor to make improvements to 50 acres of district-owned property located miles away from the proposed project,” the legal team explained.

“In other words, what we have here is a classic case of an unconstitutional shakedown. The U.S. Supreme Supreme Court has ruled that the government violates property rights – it commits a ‘taking‘ in violation of the Fifth Amendment – if it tries to use the permitting process to extract conditions that aren’t related to the impact of the proposed development.”

*** end quote ***

# – # – # – # – #   

“But regulators saw a chance to pounce and make all kinds of costly, unrelated, outrageous demands,” he said. “Without any justification, the government demanded money, labor and resources as the price for allowing the Koontzes to use their own land.
“This was a flat-out shakedown, a form of extortion,” he said.
Family members had tried for years to develop the land, but the local St. Johns River Water Management District would not issue the necessary permits, “because Koontz would not agree to costly and unjustified conditions that the district imposed.”
“Specifically, the district demanded that Koontz dedicate his money and labor to make improvements to 50 acres of district-owned property located miles away from the proposed project,” the legal team explained.
“In other words, what we have here is a classic case of an unconstitutional shakedown. The U.S. Supreme Supreme Court has ruled that the government violates property rights – it commits a ‘taking ‘ in violation of the Fifth Amendment – if it tries to use the permitting process to extract conditions that aren’t related to the impact of the proposed development.”