An eminent public issue.(Scan)

Never mind abortion, the Ten Commandments, or what Karl Rove said. In a year featuring one or two Supreme Court nominations, the issue of eminent domain draws the brightest line between Republicans and Democrats--with Democrats on the losing side.

"On just about every political issue--abortion, religion in politics, the death penalty--you'll find public opinion split pretty evenly down the middle," says John Kramer, vice president of the Institute for Justice, which is revving up an anti-eminent-domain campaign. "On this one, it's completely different. Everybody from Ralph Nader to George Will, from Molly Ivins to the Wall Street Journal editorial page, opposes the Court on this one. The instant polls conducted by CNN and MSNBC showed 96 percent against the ruling."

The ruling in question is Kelo v. New London, in which the Supreme Court decided by a 5 to 4 vote that municipal governments can take people's homes and private businesses if the land is wanted for some alternative "economic development." The Institute for Justice has already launched a national campaign entitled "Hands Off My Home." "The floodgates are opening," says Kramer. "Hours after the Supreme Court decision, Freeport, Texas filed papers to seize two family-owned seafood businesses to make way for a boat marina. Sunset Hills, Missouri voted to condemn 85 homes and businesses for a shopping mall. We're not talking about hypothetical situations anymore. These are real instances."

Faced with overwhelming public sentiment, more than half the states are taking initiatives to limit Kelo v. New London. In every instance, Republicans are leading the charge. Meanwhile, Democrats are tagging along reluctantly --or looking for a place to hide.

Within days of Kelo, the Texas House of Representatives voted 132-0 for a constitutional amendment that would bar government land seizures for "public purpose" (as opposed to "public use," approved by the U.S. Constitution). California, Tennessee, Delaware, Florida, Minnesota, and New Jersey are considering almost identical measures, all with Republican sponsors. In Wisconsin, Republican state senator David Zein has introduced a similar measure. In Michigan, Republican state senator Tony Stamas has proposed a state constitutional amendment. In Illinois, Republican representative Bill Mitchell is the principal exponent.

Many Democrats are smiling politely and pretending to agree, because the alternative is so unpopular. But letting regulators and politicians take private property to promote planned "development" schemes fits well with the basic Democratic philosophy that markets are flawed and government must ...