Civil Liberties

Two men who spent 15 years in jail for a murder they did not commit were recently declared innocent, thanks to the dogged efforts of a group that has shed a light on the failures of our criminal justice system.

It is difficult to see why those guilty of heinous crimes should retain their right to vote.

Buried in the back of the Points section is this column of real significance about over-reaching government and property seizures. Persons acquitted of a crime still cannot get their property back? What country is this? 

In a new IPI publication, “On Private Sector Use of Eminent Domain,” Tom Giovanetti confronts a difficult topic and makes the limited government case for the right for property to be taken by the private sector when there is an unwilling seller and two key conditions are met under the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause.

There is no reason for principled conservatives to oppose private sector use of eminent domain, so long as it is reserved for a public use and includes just compensation. In fact, private sector infrastructure should be preferred over taxpayer-funded, government infrastructure. Through private sector development of infrastructure, we can grow the economy without growing the government.

Tom Giovanetti, president IPI, said he was “forced to testify in cautious opposition to the legislation and it is not because we do not value property rights and it is not because we are not sympathetic to situations where this is an unwilling seller.” But he said the bill — being limited to only private, for-profit companies — seems to assume “that private sector use of eminent domain is somehow more subject to abuse than government use or that there is something that is actually inappropriate about private sector use of eminent domain.”

A government that simply takes things because it can, and then puts the burden of proof on citizens to get their property back, is a tyrannical government akin to the abuses Americans originally rebelled against. Asset forfeiture must be stopped.

A successful consumer data privacy law would be a federal law that addresses interstate issues.

Imposing carbon and gasoline taxes is not about ways to pay for needed government services. It’s about progressives trying to fund their climate change agenda.