Proposal to evict Souter in retaliation for eminent domain ruling rejected

[JURIST] Residents of Weare, New Hampshire [official website], the town where Justice David Souter [Oyez profile] of the US Supreme Court owns a farmhouse, rejected a proposal [2006 Town Warrant, Article 48, PDF] to evict Souter in a town meeting Saturday, and instead substituted a call for the state legislature to strengthen state law on eminent domain [JURIST news archive]. The proposal asked whether the town should take Souter’s farmhouse for development as an inn; whether to set up a trust fund to accept donations for legal expenses; and whether to set up a second trust fund to accept donations to compensate Souter for taking his land. Residents voted 94-59 by secret ballot to add the word “not” to the proposal put forth by a group of residents who petitioned to take away Souter’s home by eminent domain for the so called Lost Liberty Hotel [backgrounder]. Some residents protested [JURIST report] outside of Souter's home in January, but most residents of Weare primarily viewed the proposal as a vengeance campaign, led by Californian Logan Darrow Clements [campaign website], in response to the Court's 2005 decision in Kelo v. City of New London [opinion], which allowed a local government to take private property to develop a hotel, convention center, office space and condominiums. AP has more.



 

About Paper Chase

Paper Chase is JURIST's real-time legal news service, powered by a team of 30 law student reporters and editors led by law professor Bernard Hibbitts at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. As an educational service, Paper Chase is dedicated to presenting important legal news and materials rapidly, objectively and intelligibly in an accessible format.

© Copyright JURIST Legal News and Research Services, Inc., 2013.