Supremes keep smackin' around the Ninth Circuit

[Northern_Piper]

@Stratocaster

Or Kelo v. the City of New London, in which SCOTUS determined that the phrase “for public use” actually meant “not necessarily for public use.” Another flouting of a duly ratified piece of legislation.

I thought that in Kelo, SCOTUS upheld the duly ratified piece of legislation, allowing the state aciton to go ahead, as not bing in violation of the takings clause?

[Stratocaster]

@Northern_Piper

I thought that in Kelo, SCOTUS upheld the duly ratified piece of legislation, allowing the state aciton to go ahead, as not bing in violation of the takings clause?

Yep, the duly ratified piece of legislation I referred to was the U.S. Constitution.