Pung v. Isabella County · ¶94
In my view, that is the point of the Takings Clause, which necessarily prioritizes homeowners' property rights over the government's interest in efficiency and public necessity. “William Blackstone wrote that `the law of the land . . . postpone[s] even public necessity to the sacred and inviolable rights of private property.' ” Kelo, 545 U. S., at 505 (Thomas, J., dissenting) (quoting 1 Blackstone 134–135). Whatever utilitarian desire the State may have for a tax- collection system that effectively confscates citizens' homes based on small tax debts, citizens such as the Pungs have an antecedent and higher right to those homes.Read in context ›
preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.