Eminent Domain

[KillerMuffin]

Essentially eminent domain is defined as "The power to take private property for public use by a state, municipality, or private person or corporation authorized to exercise functions of public character."

Most governments have enacted laws that give them eminent domain.

In the US, we have it narrowed down to specifics. "To exercise the power of eminent domain, the government must prove that the four elements set forth in the Fifth Amendment are present: (1) private property (2) must be taken (3) for public use (4) and with just compensation."

Thoughts? Opinions? Discussions? Do you think we need eminent domain? What do you know about it from personal experience? What kind of recompense should victims of ED abuse get from the government? Bear in mind that as taxpayers, you fund the government and any compensation it must pay.

 

[Siren]

ED is a way for the government to basically steal land away from owners

 

[shadowsource]

It's nice in principle...

We can all imagine situations where a government service is needed (for the hyper-libertarians, a fort during time of genuine national military emergency). But it's mostly misused, going all the way back to seizures for railroad construction 150 years ago. Thems that gots get paid or mapped out of the seizure; those without connections get devoured. The newest example will be the power-line construction seizures that the Adminstration's Energy Bill wishes to authorize via your Congesspeople very soon. We all know that land is not going to be taken from the powerful, and this law will open up a whole new, Federal pretext for seizures. On the other hand, I can well imagine that it will be nearly impossible to create a national energy grid without such seizures. So why do we need a national energy grid? That's a thread that won't happen til someone on the board is being driven off their land at gunpoint. I sure hope it's not Killer....

 

[Shy Tall Guy]

Thoughts? Opinions? Discussions? Do you think we need eminent domain? What do you know about it from personal experience? What kind of recompense should victims of ED abuse get from the government? Bear in mind that as taxpayers, you fund the government and any compensation it must pay.

Possibly a necessary evil - although it is certainly often misused.

I glanced once at a book in the library - "Takings : Private Property and the Power of Eminent Domain", by Richard A. Epstein - I don't know how good it is as I wasn't that interested, but it is recommended by Libertarians.

I am more interested and upset about a related issue; Civil Forfeiture. This is where law enforcement officers can confiscate and keep property and money without charging you with a crime is they *suspect* the property was come by via illegal means. You then have to prove the property was legally obtained before you can get it back.

People have had cash confiscated just because they had the money folded the same way it is claimed drug dealers do - or just for having large amounts of cash.

In essence you are presumed guilty until proven innocent. It is thus because it is the property that is charged with a crime and not the person - and the property has no rights. It used to be that you had to put up a bond before being able to go to court to get your property/money back - I think that has changed federally, but I don't know if that affects state actions (Siren?).

This is so fundamentally unfair and wrong that people often do not believe me when I tell them about it. Some deny rather vehemently even when pointed to the supporting law cites.

For those that are not familiar with this, just do a search on "civil forfeiture" in a search engine (google is good) or go to www.fear.org.

STG

 

[shadowsource]

Re: Re: Eminent Domain

I am more interested and upset about a related issue; Civil Forfeiture. This is where law enforcement officers can confiscate and keep property and money without charging you with a crime is they *suspect* the property was come by via illegal means. You then have to prove the property was legally obtained before you can get it back.
go to www.fear.org.STG

Thanks, sir. That's a good site. And you're totally correct: Under the guise of the drug war, the statist freaks have blown giant holes in the Constitution. A lot of people who talk about strict constructionism (what did the Founders intend) don't like to think about what jefferson, Adams, etc. would have thought of the government seizing your property BEFORE you're convicted, which just happens to make it very hard to hire Johnny Cochran. They would have laughed it off the page. But governments large and small now thrive off seizures, often from potheads who work hard and pay their taxes, grow a little weed in the backyard, often for medical purposes. It will take many years before the surpreme court adjusts its rulings to make "forfeitures" harder. And if Bush gets to name anyone, it'll be a LOT longer.

 

[Shy Tall Guy]

Re: Re: Re: Eminent Domain

A lot of people who talk about strict constructionism (what did the Founders intend) don't like to think about what jefferson, Adams, etc. would have thought of the government seizing your property BEFORE you're convicted,

Actually civil forfeiture has been around since the we formed the US - it just wasn't as wide spread and wasn't as abused as it is now. The Coast Guard used to be the Revenue Cutter Service and their main function was to intercept smugglers who didn't pay import taxes and confiscate their ships and goods via civil forfeiture.

Nowadays civil forfeiture accounts for about 10+ Billion (yes Billion with a B) dollars in revenue, a good portion of which goes to the agencies that do the confiscation. A powerful motive to confiscate and keep on confiscating.

STG

 

[Bob Peale]

Sadly, it is a necessary evil.

As humans, and even worse, as Americans, we've proven time and again that the whims ofthe few overshadow the rights of the many unless someone intercedes.

For most of us, if our local school was bursting at the seams with no end in sight, the thought of, "Hmm, maybe I should sell my land/house to the county so they can expand the school," will never spring forth from our lips.

Or, should we decide to bus the little monsters to eas the crowding, we'll bitch and moan about the congestion on the roads that the buses bring, but none of us will walk over to the legislative offices and enter in negotiations with the gov't to sell our house so the road can be widened.

As in most cases, absolute power corrupts absolutely, and the concept has been abused, but it's gone both ways. For instance, the Supreme Court has just ruled that in the case of lands being declared wetlands, owners have the right to fair compensation even if they purchase the land with full knowledge that the ruling is pending.