The real problem with Kelo: by intervening without jurisdiction in a state-level eminent domain case, the U.S. Supreme Court has imperiled property rights nationwide.(Susette Kelo, government property acquisition)

Imagine sitting on the porch of the farmhouse you inherited from Morn and Dad. You have 20 acres on the fringe of a small city, but within corporate limits. Though the city's commercial growth has insidiously crept closer to your land, you have never worried about losing it. It is yours, and so is the view of the rivulet running through it.

But while you are enjoying the verdant vista, a nameless developer, along with nameless city officials, is plotting your land's future. A "better use" for your property, they decided, would be a small industrial park and shopping center. This would encourage "economic development," a euphemism for the increased tax revenue that would occur as a result of giving your land to a large commercial interest.

The plotters offer you "fair-market" price for the land, less than what you would receive if you sold it on the market. You refuse. Five years later, a court rules that the private developer can seize your land with "just compensation."

This scenario, save a few minor details, just played out in Connecticut, the court in question being the Supreme Court of the United States. But what the High Court said is less disturbing than the fact that the court said anything at all. The decision sets a precedent that could acutely affect property owners in all 50 states. But that's just one problem with the case. A second is how the Constitution was misused again by people who should know better.

Official Plunder

The case was Kelo v. City of New London. Using the stalking horse of a private development corporation, New London sought to seize an…