It's funny, but it's grossly inappropriate - the push by Freestar Media (commercial site here) to get the Town of Weare, New Hampshire, to take Justice Souter's home by eminent domain and give it to hotel developers for the Lost Liberty Inn. Some of the people pushing this (tongue-in-cheek or not) should know better. Alex Tabarrok, this means you. Radley Balko, you too. My former professor, Randy Barnett, got it right on his second take: "Retaliating against a judge for the good faith exercise of his duty is. . .a bad idea."
A bad idea that spits in the face of the independent judiciary and undermines the rule of law. (And, as Professor Barnett points out, violates Kelo anyway.) Kelo is a horrible decision that offends me on almost every level, but not as much as retaliating against a Supreme Court Justice.
UPDATE: Professor Volokh thinks that some of the criticism of the Take Souter's Home crowd is over the top, though he agrees we don't want "government agencies to retaliate against government officials by seizing their property." I think he misses something: retaliating against a judge for construing a law is an especially odious kind of retaliation. Much worse than a mere retaliation for an official's action, it is an attack on one of the key underpinnings of our society of laws: judicial review, the rule of law itself. Is it mugging Scalia? No. But it isn't less wrong.