Eminent domain allows governments to legally take private property for public use. In the US, this was traditionally only allowed for necessary and justifiable public use, but a 2005 Supreme Court ruling expanded the definition to include anything that brings additional tax revenue. Many states have since changed their laws to more strictly define public use. The Fifth Amendment requires fair compensation for seized property based on fair market value.
Eminent domain is the right of a governmental body – usually a country, state, city, town, or county – to legally appropriate a private individual’s property for its own use. That the owner does not want to part with his land or residence is of no consequence and has very few legal recourses. If the government body in question wishes to take the property, it has every right to do so.
In the United States, it was generally understood that a government could not seize private property unless it was for a necessary and justifiable public use. Prosecution, also known as sentencing, was usually exercised in specific cases, often involving some type of public utility construction. For example, land was appropriated under the laws of eminent domains if it was in the path of a proposed highway or if certain sections of a property were needed to install sewage, power or telephone lines. The eminent domain was also exercised for the construction of schools and parks, or for occupying urban areas that had become so degraded as to constitute a danger to the local population.
The framers of the United States Constitution were traditionally believed to hold that private property rights were sacred, not to be violated unless there was an urgent need affecting the public welfare. However, the authors also seemed to realize that abuse was always possible. Thus was born the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. In short, it states that landowners must be fairly compensated for assets seized under the Eminent Domains laws, with compensation based on a fair market value. Fair market value is usually defined as the highest price a private seller would offer for the property.
However, eminent domain laws underwent a transformation when, in 2005, the US Supreme Court handed down its ruling in the case of Kelo v. the City of New London. In this case, the City of New London, Connecticut wanted to condemn a sizable portion of land that was in an economically depressed area. The land was to be transferred to a private developer, who intended to build houses, condominiums and commercial structures. Suzette Kelo, an area resident who didn’t want to lose her home, filed a lawsuit against New London.
The Supreme Court, in a five to four decision, ruled in favor of the city. This was a case in point, as it implied that “public use” could now be defined as anything that brings additional tax revenue to a government body or municipality. Since that time, due primarily to public outcry, over 40 states have changed their eminent domain laws to more strongly define what “public use” means. Some constitutions now explicitly state that eminent domain cannot involve the transfer of seized property to an individual or corporation for profit. Other states have been less strict, and as of 2009, the exact definition of eminent domain remains uncertain.
Protect your devices with Threat Protection by NordVPN
