Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Eminent domain is necessary evil for large private/public projects. Major roads and highways, levees, power lines, pipe lines etc. These are things you simply cannot avoid, they have to go somewhere and without eminent domain these projects could never go forward.
It's abused and should never be used for large commercial developments like a mall, Wal Mart etc. A mall can be built anywhere and grabbing private property just because it's a desirable location should never be an excuse.
Kelo v. New London changed the whole underpinning of eminent domain. The Supreme Court decided that private property could be taken for a private development which would enhance the tax base.
Historically eminent domain was used to acquire property for public uses such as roads, schools, etc. and, in some cases, for a private endeavor such as constructing gas or power lines.
In Kelo, property was acquired in order for a developer to build an upscale housing and commercial development. After Kelo (the homeowner) had to sell out the project ended up never being done.
If you note, the four Justices who dissented are typically considered conservatives.
Trump had a similar situation where the owner wouldn't sell (this was pre-Kelo) and he had to build around the property. It was recently sold at tax sale.
Kelo is complete crap. The supreme court (the justices that voted in favor) should have been disbarred for that decision.
Private property was a huge issue for the founding fathers. for everything was considered the property of the King and none was secure in their property. It seems that in today's world we have just replaced the "King" with the "Federal government".
Madison stated: "Government is instituted to protect property of every sort .... This being the end of government, that is NOT a just government,... nor is property secure under it, where the property which a man has ... is violated by arbitrary seizures of one class of citizens for the service of the rest."
The Constitution establishes the rules of the road for eminent domain: private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation. I.e., government can take private property and turn it to public use as long as just compensation is paid for the private property. That is the power of eminent domain. Kelo v. New London expanded the definition of "public use" in a way that I'm concerned about, but there has never been a question from a constitutional perspective that eminent domain is a legitimate exercise of government power--it simply has to be for public use and just compensation must be paid.
It looks like conservatives are against Trump on the issue of "eminent domain", (an agency basically forcing a sale of public property) but it sure seems someone like Bernie Sanders would be against it as well... or does it depend on who benefits? "Millionaires and Billionaires" ... or "Big Govenment"?
Socialists are generally FOR socialist policies.E.D. is a giant socialist hole brought by 4 liberal justices and a fence sitter IIRC.
What socialist justices were around in 1625 when Hugo Grotius first coined the phrase and which of the Framers of the Constitution were these nefarious socialist when they incorporated the Taking Clause in the Constitution?
It looks like conservatives are against Trump on the issue of "eminent domain", (an agency basically forcing a sale of public property) but it sure seems someone like Bernie Sanders would be against it as well... or does it depend on who benefits? "Millionaires and Billionaires" ... or "Big Govenment"?
I have been on committee's to fight WALMART and irresponsible development. Eminent Domain as it is used today is legalized, local gov sponsored theft, plain and simply. Another one of those laws that kooks have corrupted. Needs to be done away with. Im a Bernie voter BTW . . .
It looks like conservatives are against Trump on the issue of "eminent domain", (an agency basically forcing a sale of public property) but it sure seems someone like Bernie Sanders would be against it as well... or does it depend on who benefits? "Millionaires and Billionaires" ... or "Big Govenment"?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
