A few days later on Fox, Palin rattled off a number of decisions she supposedly opposed. One of the rulings that Palin named is an eminent domain case, Kelo v. City of New London. In Kelo, the court ruled that local governments have the right to seize private property for the sake of economic development.

At first blush, it seems like a good pick for an Alaskan with a libertarian streak.

The only problem is that in 2002, Palin sued a local landowner in Wasilla to seize his property, the proposed site of a new sports complex that included an indoor ice hockey rink.

That eminent domain case has wound through the courts for six years, at a cost of about $1.75 million. As of this July, the matter was still being worked out.

The case didn’t come up in the Fox interview, when Palin said: “The Kelo case dealt with eminent domain. That affects me as a governor and it affected me as a mayor also. Private property rights are so precious in this nation, and for the Supreme Court to have sided with government instead of the people, the property owners on that–that was frustrating.”