To The Editor:
Re: Justices Uphold Taking Property for Development (New York Times front page June 24, 2005)
Take a look at U.S. Supreme Court SMITH v. ORGANIZATION OF FOSTER FAMILIES, 431 U.S. 816 (1977) 431 U.S. 816, which I believe is the case that gave us what might be called the “in the best interest of the child” doctrine, which was subsequently used by judges to end the parental rights of fit parents; and by “fit parents” I mean parents who were actually judged to be fit enough to be their own children’s’ parents by those very judges who were about to be taking away their parental rights, in favor of the new spouse of their former marriage partner who was judged to be better-off financially for instance then the less successful parent; i.e. the one on the wrong side (read: the poorer side) of the divorce.
If you are wondering why I am talking about adoption and parental rights, watch carefully and you will see the connection. If judges can justify the ending of the parental rights of a fit parent, how much more so, a fortiori, should they be able to end anyone’s rights to property, such as a home that has been in ones family for generations, in favor of those who they may judge to be able to make a use that would be, in their judgment, in the “best interest” of the community at large.
The laws of our land are becoming more-and-more a slippery slope on which any and all of us are subject to being allowed to slide (read: be pushed) down into the tar pit of oblivion. The rights of parents, protected under the Constitution, have been judged to be subject to whatever a judge interprets to be in the “best interest” of one’s child. Now, with this latest Supreme Court ruling, the rights of property owners are limited to whatever a judge may deem to be in the “best interest” of a community and that judge can have that property seized and given over to another person, or even to a non-person, in the case of corporations.
What’s next? Next, judges are going to tell us who of us are to have babies with which partner and who will be raising those children in what houses (no sense calling them homes any more) so the best interest of the state can be served.
Sound familiar? I am not surprised. I am furious. Or is it Fuhrer-ious?
Drew Kopf
|
