Ironic that something in pro-Obama is being so loudly objected to by environmentalists and supported by a justice appointed by Trump.
sounds more like NIMBYs than environmentalists.
I don't think the "NIMBY" label really fits, given that it's mostly become shorthand for people who oppose infill housing. Not quite sure that's an equivalent dynamic to opposition to a tourist attraction proposed to be built on top of a neighborhood park. The membership of groups like POP is mostly longtime Hyde Park and South Shore residents who are happy with the center being built on a site that, for many, would be closer to their backyards than the Jackson Park site.
There's also a more legitimate assertion to some sort of right over the land involved than you get in most cases of "NIMBYism," which mostly involve neighbors attempting to block developers from building on privately-owned land. The land in this case is public lakefront parkland, which "by right belongs to the people." Putting a private center (not a library; it's a private entity with no connection to the National Archives) on top of public parkland certainly violates the spirit of how Chicago has always thought about its lakefront — forever open, clear and free — even if, as Justice Barrett concluded, not the letter.
