Solomonster

Souter deserves it. His judicial philosphy says that its ok for a community to sieze property because one party wants it more than another.

Lets say Tom Smith has a shack on the edge of town ... right where Walmart wants to put their latest super store. The town can take Tom's land and give it to Walmart because Walmart has more money and connections. Its one thing to make way for highways and whatnot that are clearly for the public good. But giving Tom's land to Walmart because it will let Walmart make more money is reprehensible, I think.

Screw Souter. I think it was a lousy decision and I think it would serve him right and maybe think harder about his decision.