Would you be referring to the same courts that ruled the 5th Amendment gives you the right to burn the American flag in public, but does not give you the right to wear it? Or, the courts thar ruled the federal government can seize a legally grown agricultural product because it may interfere with existing illegal interstate commerce? Or, the same courts that ruled the corporations (and not the individuals owning the corporations) are equal to the individual? Or the same courts that ruled the people who wrote legislation didn't know the definitions of the words they were using (I.e. "penalty")?<quoted text>
Now this has came into the spot light it could get interesting.
But as much as the progressives want to grumble about it this will return the courts and be battled there.
I could list insane rulings by corrupt courts for days here. That gives me no solace. They can arrange for some corrupt judge to ignore the Constitution and rule any way they want. That's a huge problem we have here in this country, and it seems to be getting very much worse lately.
Somehow, we have to make the courts apply and enforce the Constitution.
I wonder what that will take.
As for this issue, the first evidence submitted by the federal government should be:
The date the government paid "just compensation";
The amount the government paid; and
To whom the government paid.
When these facts are submitted, then it will be proven to the American people that the federal government actually owns the land.
Then, we can get to the issue of Clark County paying a lease for the land, and the federal government continuing to collect a tax on the use of the land it already "leased" to Clark County.
If the federal government doesn't even own the land, then we can investigate the federal government extorting Clark County.