That's what I keep hearing in the eminent domain matter. "Yes, but the state's not taking the property, they're paying market value for it." Yea, right, tell that to Kelo and her co-plaintiffs in the New London case that went all the way to the Supremes. In addition to receiving only year 2000 market value as payment for their homes, the city will also offset that amount by 5 years of back rent they claim is owed for the period of time from the original eminent domain action all while the case was working its way through the state's own marvelously efficient court and legal system. If the owners had rented their homes out during that time, the city is seeking to take all of that money, too. In many cases, owners will get zero for their homes and will be pursued for additional claims by the city. Here's a good writeup on the matter by McQ. One owner will end up "owing" over $300,000, and the lead plaintiff, Kelo, will "owe" $57,000. This is what happens when you take on the state, especially when you're right and everyone knows it, making them look so awful. I mean, would you...