Tag: private property

Supreme Court Overrules Local Governments For Seizing Homes

The U.S. Supreme Court reversed court rulings in which local governments seized two homes over unpaid tax debts and kept sale proceeds that far exceeded the tax owed.

Critics call the practice “home equity theft.”

The case came after Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF), which represented the homeowners in both cases, released a report late last year saying that 12 states and the District of Columbia allow local governments and private investors to seize dramatically more than what is owed from homeowners who fall behind on property tax payments. PLF is a national nonprofit public interest law firm that takes on governmental overreach.

The U.S. Supreme Court released unsigned orders (pdf) on June 5 summarily reversing two rulings of the Supreme Court of Nebraska.

The nation’s highest court did not explain why it was issuing the orders. No justices dissented.

Keep reading

Federal Government Unconstitutionally Seized Over 600 Million Acres

The federal government lost track of almost 15 million acres of land — an area that would cover the states of Vermont, New Hampshire, and Connecticut — yet insists that federal agencies are the best stewards of “public” land.

An article published by the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) relates how this massive mishandling of resources came to light:

“Across America, 15 million acres of state and federal land is surrounded by private land, with no legal entry by road or trail. If this so-called landlocked land was one contiguous piece, it would form the largest national park in the country, nearly the size of Vermont, New Hampshire and Connecticut combined,” [according to The New York Times]. “Most of these inaccessible public lands are in the West, and, until recently, their existence was largely unknown.”

The land was only discovered, according to another recent Times article, because of a smartphone app called OnX. “OnX was born when Eric Siegfried, a mechanical engineer and part-time hunting guide in Montana, decided to make a Google Maps for the wilderness,” the Times reports.

While the FEE article transitions into a discussion of whether the government or private interests would make better use of this enormous swath of land, this article will take a different tack: what does the U.S. Constitution say about the federal government’s authority to own land within the territory of the sovereign states.

Keep reading

Phoenix Allows NFL to Determine What Residents Can Display on Their Property During Super Bowl

The Arizona-based Goldwater Institute (GI) has called out the city of Phoenix for imposing free speech restrictions on residents in a “Special Promotional and Civic Event Area” (Clean Zone) leading up to and through the 2023 Super Bowl.

“By delegating unfettered censorship power to private entities, the city of Phoenix has launched a blatant attack on its own citizens’ free speech rights under both the U.S. Constitution and the Arizona Constitution. It’s simple: Phoenicians shouldn’t need to ask the NFL for permission to communicate with the public on their own private property,” said GI Staff Attorney John Thorpe in a statement emailed to The Arizona Sun Times.

The Sun Times reached out to the city of Phoenix for additional comments but did not hear back.

Thorpe sent a letter Tuesday to the city regarding this issue. He explained that under Resolution 22073, passed by the city, all temporary signage in the Clean Zone “not authorized by the NFL or the Arizona Super Bowl Host Committee” (ASBHC) are restricted. According to Thorpe, these restrictions cover nearly all of downtown Phoenix and will be in effect until February 19th, 2023.

The city of Phoenix states that the final day to get any temporary sign applications approved is December 15th.

This ordinance has allegedly caused trouble for one Phoenician business and property owner, Bramley Paulin. The GI represents Paulin in this situation and shared that he reached out to potential partners about leasing and advertising but was rejected because of the city’s restrictions.

Aside from the aforementioned free speech violations, Thorpe argued that the city is also improperly delegating its government power. As established in Industrial Commission v C D Pipeline, the government “may not delegate its authority to private persons over whom [it] has no supervision or control.” Therefore, the city violates this by giving private entities, the NFL and ASBHC, regulation over private citizens’ free speech. Additionally, the city’s ordinance may violate the Equal Privileges and Immunities Clause and the Gift Clause.

Keep reading

Are Game Wardens Watching You? – Part 1: The Case of the Hidden Trail Camera

Imagine you go hunting one morning, on your own land, and you find a cellular trail camera that isn’t yours. Now imagine that the camera was obviously placed in such a way as to be entirely hidden from you—except for a hole cut through the brush so that it could surveil the comings and goings on your property.

You’d probably be creeped out and pull that camera down, right? That’s what Hunter Hollingsworth of Camden, Tennessee, did when he spotted an unknown trail camera pointed toward the gravel road through his family farm.

Then a few months later, he found his home surrounded by armed law-enforcement officers who threatened to kick his door down if he didn’t let them inside to search for the camera. This was just the beginning of a series of events that snowballed into a lawsuit that would eventually put a national spotlight on the near century-old practice of game wardens entering private land without a search warrant. The case would go on to fundamentally change how officers with the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency are able to do their jobs—and it could set precedents for similar cases in other states, too.

But no matter where you live and hunt, the Hunter Hollingsworth case—and the cases it continues to inspire—could ultimately decide whether you might one day find a camera hidden in your trees, or a game warden on your property without a warrant.

Keep reading

Boston University Professor Calls Property “a Racist Construct” and Justifies the Violent Protests of the George Floyd Riots

Saida Grundy, a Boston University assistant professor, called property a racist construct and urged people to refrain from judging the actions of minority communities to events such as the death of George Floyd. 

In a video posted by the University, Grundy says that the looting during the riots that followed the George Floyd case is similar to Black Americans “looting themselves” out of the place of being slaves. The video was produced to mark the second anniversary of Floyd’s death. 

“We hear President Biden say, you know, I understand your frustrations but don’t destroy property,” Grundy said in the University’s video. “Well, when you say that to Black people who historically have been property, one of our greatest weapons against injustice was the looting of ourselves as property from the system of slavery.”

“And what we see in communities is they’re reacting to the very racism of what we call property,” Grundy added.

Keep reading

Charity Builds Dozens of Tiny Homes for Homeless on PRIVATE PROPERTY, Cops & Gov’t Destroy All Of It

In 2020, The Free Thought Project reported on the work of two groups, Food Not Bombs and the Sidewalk Project, who raised $16,000 and built 26 tiny homes in Las Vegas for the city’s homeless community. It was an amazing feat put together by a handful of caring people trying to better their community but it came to a chaotic and destructive end when police and city officials raided the camp and destroyed all the homes.

The City of Las Vegas claimed that the destruction of the homes was justified as the city maintains “this right of way for NDOT, the property owner.” Joey Lankowski, who does homeless outreach with Food Not Bombs, sought to remedy this problem of building tiny homes on public property by raising money to purchase their own swath of land on private property.

Since last year, members of Food Not Bombs, the Sidewalk Project, and the New Leaf Community have been working tirelessly, volunteering countless hours of their personal time, to build a community of tiny homes on this newly owned piece of property.

For months volunteers built the tiny homes and allowed the community’s houseless population to live on the property. The community was thriving until earlier this year when the bureaucratic police state set their sights on the project’s private property.

The code enforcement division of the Las Vegas city government claimed that the property was in violation of zoning ordinance NLVMC 17.20.10 which states that the “accessory uses are not permitted” on the private property. According to the notice, a single family residence must be on the property before the tiny homes could be built and heavy fines would follow if they did not get “up to code.”

Since then, the city has waged an immoral war against the tiny home community and levied even more seemingly frivolous ordinance violations.

Keep reading