The Slippery Slope of Eminent Domain

Eminent domain is the inherent power of the state to seize a citizen's private property or rights in private property, without the owner's consent. The property is taken either for government use or by delegation to third parties who will devote it to "public uses." The most common uses of property taken by eminent domain are public utilities, highways, and railroads. Some states require that the government body offer to purchase the property before resorting to the use of eminent domain.

The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution requires that property may only be taken for "public use", and upon payment of "just compensation". But the U.S. Supreme Court has diluted the meaning of "public use" to such an extent that virtually anything that a local condemning authority declares to be "public use" will be accepted by the Supreme Court and the lower federal courts.

Some state courts disagree and in recent years the courts of Illinois, Michigan, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Pennsylvania have taken the position that the taking of private land for so-called "economic redevelopment" -- i.e., for reconveyance of the taken land to private companies for the construction of private, profit-making enterprises such as shopping malls, factories, office buildings and even gambling casinos does not meet the "public use" limitation under the state Constitution.

On June 23rd, 2006, the one-year anniversary of the Kelo decision, President George Bush issued an executive order stating in Section I that the Federal Government must limit its use of taking private property for "public use" with "just compensation", which is also stated in the constitution, for the "purpose of benefiting the general public." He limits this use by stating that it may not be used "for the purpose of advancing the economic interest of private parties to be given ownership or use of the property taken."

Property-rights advocates contend that abuses of the exercise of these powers in the past require substantial additional safeguards to protect the people from having their homes and businesses taken for what are obviously private, not public, uses.

Recently, here in New York we are hearing the word phrase “eminent domain” too often. Atlantic Yards, Willets Point and the Kosciusko Bridge are just a few areas where the city is applying eminent domain to advance their plans for development.
Throughout history there has been no greater battle than the protection and preservation individual property rights.

It is a slippery slope if we allow the government to dictate the confiscation of
private lands for a better “public use”. Eminent domain can create an eminent danger of too much government interference on individual rights.