The Reverse Robin Hood Effect

Whatever would the Founding Fathers think of America’s recent loss of property rights? Has the 21st Century interpretation of their vision relegated cherished freedoms to the abyss of time?

The Supreme Court’s recent decision allowing government the power to take personal property from one and give to another is a gross constitutional violation. Article V reads as follows: “…nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

The question is a definition of public use. There can be no doubt that the Founding Fathers envisioned public use to be a necessary government owned facility such as a courthouse, school, or road. Would the Founding Fathers have approved of taking a plantation and giving it to another individual to build a privately owned tavern, store, or stable? Of course not! The Founding Fathers would have assumed that the individual planning to build the tavern would negotiate with various landowners until he reached an agreement regarding the sale. He would then consummate the transaction in the prescribed legal manner. Should a property owner not wish to sell, then the person planning to build the tavern would approach another property owner who might have a greater propensity to sell.

Would the Founding Fathers have approved of the “Reverse Robin Hood Effect” where property is taken from the poor and given to the rich? They would have, instead, thought our government had lost its mind. Public use is not a municipality’s desire to maximize their tax base at the expense of private property owners. Private property is not theirs to take. And shouldn’t government be in support of its people rather than an adversary?

Its time for our citizens to step back and evaluate the extremes to which governmental and judicial authority has been taken. Possibly the next trip to the ballot box should be to vote for change.

This entry was posted in The Nation, Tidewater, Virginia. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply