WEARE, N.H. (AP) – Don’t worry, David Souter, your home is still safe.

Activists angered by last year’s U.S. Supreme Court decision on property rights wanted to get back at the justice by trying to seize his more than 200-year-old farmhouse to build an inn – but that proposal fizzled in February.

In what’s turned out to be a largely symbolic gesture, town voters decided Tuesday 1,167 to 493 to have the selectmen leave Souter’s house alone – and instead urged the New Hampshire Legislature to adopt a law that forbids such property transfers to private interests for economic development via eminent domain.

“It makes Souter the only person in the United States that would be given special protection against his own ruling,” said Logan Darrow Clements of Los Angeles, a businessman who led the campaign to evict Souter and called the new proposal a complete reversal from the original.

Even if the majority of voters had rejected the proposal, Souter’s home would be safe. Souter has not commented on the matter, which started when he sided with a 5-4 majority to support New London, Conn.’s efforts to seize homes for economic development.

“The idea is to use the ruling that David Souter voted for on David Souter, so that he can understand the importance of property rights and the error of the ruling,” Clements said.

In Weare, two of the major players in the Souter fight were disappointed that their proposal was weakened at February’s town meeting, in which residents decided on the language of their ballot issues before actually voting on them. Nevertheless, they were running for selectman Tuesday for two open seats on the five-member board. Both lost.

Standing in the early morning fog outside the polls Tuesday, Keith LaCasse, one of the losing candidates, said he would not lobby the board to seize Souter’s home unless a proposal actually saying so appears on next year’s ballot.

“I would support it if people voted in favor,” he said.

Joshua Solomon, another supporter of the “Lost Liberty Hotel” proposal, also ran for selectman and lost. Incumbents Leon Methot and Thomas Clow were re-elected. Walter Bohlin lost.

Bohlin, who spoke out against the original hotel proposal last month, leading residents to change the language, said he received threatening e-mails and phone calls afterward. He said he was not running to defend Souter’s home, but because he believes selectmen don’t keep adequate minutes and aren’t following the “Right to Know” law.

Evelyn Connor, the town clerk, said there are 5,577 registered voters in Weare and she expected half of them to vote Tuesday. Last year, about 2,200 people voted.

While no one keeps track of warrant articles in all of New Hampshire’s towns and cities, opponents of the Supreme Court decision said several communities were voting in town elections Tuesday to limit eminent domain.

Ken Blevens sponsored a warrant article in Bow that would require two-thirds of the town’s voters, instead of the board of selectmen, to approve any seizure of property through eminent domain.

“I’m not eliminating eminent domain,” Blevens said. “I’m just putting a few roadblocks in so the chance of it being abused would be less.”

In Atkinson, the planning board is recommending that voters approve an ordinance that would ban taking property for private development or financial gain. The warrant article says land could be taken only for public sector use, “and only if said uses provide direct access and use to and by the public.”