Embed Notice

HTML Code

<blockquote style="position: relative; padding-left: 55px;"><section><a href="https://sfba.social/users/johnlogic/statuses/113080891936789575">John Carlsen 🇺🇸🇳🇱🇪🇺 (johnlogic@sfba.social)'s status on Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 04:41:16 JST</a><a href="https://sfba.social/@johnlogic" title="johnlogic@sfba.social"><img src="https://gnusocial.jp/avatar/104933-48-20230511195719.webp" width="48" height="48" alt="John Carlsen 🇺🇸🇳🇱🇪🇺" style="position: absolute; left: 0; top: 0;">John Carlsen 🇺🇸🇳🇱🇪🇺</a><div><a href="https://friedcheese.us/objects/52aa8c8a-c403-4729-9793-5c6afe254e54" rel="in-reply-to">in reply to</a><ul><li><li><a href="https://gnusocial.jp/user/31341" title="peterbronez@hachyderm.io">Peter Bronez</a></li><li><a href="https://gnusocial.jp/user/274913" title="feld@friedcheese.us">feld</a></li></ul></div></section><article><p><a href="https://friedcheese.us/users/feld">@feld</a> <a href="https://hachyderm.io/@PeterBronez">@PeterBronez</a> <a href="https://meow.social/@patterfloof">@patterfloof</a> </p><p>The case about reversion is interesting and certainly reasonable; I see it as balancing the power of eminent domain and squatters' rights, albeit in favor of the previous owner.</p><p>The 2011 Colorado Law Review article looks interesting and will take me some time to read. Thank you for sharing it.</p><p>However, eminent domain laws work, are regularly upheld, and are being used right now to build California's high-speed railway system.</p><p><a href="https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-11-30/state-appeals-court-rejects-challenge-to-bullet-train-project" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-11-30/state-appeals-court-rejects-challenge-to-bullet-train-project</a></p></article><footer><a rel="bookmark" href="https://gnusocial.jp/conversation/3613583#notice-7087970">In conversation</a><time datetime="2024-09-05T04:41:16+09:00" title="Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 04:41:16 JST">about 9 months ago</time> <span>from <span><a href="https://gnusocial.jp/notice/7087970" rel="external" title="Sent from gnusocial.jp via ActivityPub">gnusocial.jp</a></span></span><a href="https://gnusocial.jp/notice/7087970">permalink</a></footer></blockquote>

Corresponding Notice

Embed this notice
John Carlsen 🇺🇸🇳🇱🇪🇺 (johnlogic@sfba.social)'s status on Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 04:41:16 JSTJohn Carlsen 🇺🇸🇳🇱🇪🇺
in reply to
@feld @PeterBronez @patterfloof
The case about reversion is interesting and certainly reasonable; I see it as balancing the power of eminent domain and squatters' rights, albeit in favor of the previous owner.
The 2011 Colorado Law Review article looks interesting and will take me some time to read. Thank you for sharing it.
However, eminent domain laws work, are regularly upheld, and are being used right now to build California's high-speed railway system.
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-11-30/state-appeals-court-rejects-challenge-to-bullet-train-project
In conversationabout 9 months ago from gnusocial.jppermalink

Public

Embed Notice

HTML Code

Corresponding Notice