Arguments Against Eminent Domain

523 Words2 Pages

Eminent Domain is something that the government put into place so that they can take a person’s land at any time, for almost any reason. Sometimes there are good reasons that the government would want to do this, such as needing to build pipe lines for water or oil and such things like that, but the bigger picture is, is they do not care about the homes or the people living there or the families that they could be hurting while trying to do these things. Iowa or even America was built on being able to prosper off of our own land and live off of our land. I think Eminent domain should be eliminated as a government practice because America was built on being able to own and use our land. This government practice threatens the ability of many citizens to make a living. When the government needs someone’s land they do ask to buy first, however if the owner does not want to sell, that is when eminent domain is put into place. If the government wants the land and the owner refuses to sell they are still compensated for the cost of land, which is stated in the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Eminent was put in place so that private land could be used to public use to better the state or country depending on the situation. Some feel that this is not right, that eminent domain takes away from a person’s personal rights to own land. …show more content…

Eminent Domain is really a hard thing for courts, because the property owners have started to “rebel” against this “law.” This process is called inverse condemnation. According to one web site I found it says to exercise eminent domain, the government much prove that the four elements set forth in the Fifth Amendment are present: (1) private property (2) much be taken (3) for public use (4) and with just compensation.

Show More
Related

  • Troubles with Eminent Domain in Iceland

    542 Words  | 2 Pages

    Iceland recognizes the issue of eminent domain, as they have had trouble with this in regards to geothermal deposits. However, they agree with the ECHR regarding rights to fair compensation. Governments should only take property if it will benefit the public as a whole.

    Read More

  • Hawaii Housing Authority versus Midkiff

    991 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Land Reform Act of 1967 permitted the state of Hawaii to redistribute land by condemning and acquiring private property from landlords (the lessors) in order to sell it to another private owner, in this case, their tenants (the lessees). The Hawaii State Legislature passed the Land Reform Act after discovering that nearly forty-seven percent (47%) of the state was owned by only seventy-two (72) private land owners. That meant that only forty-nine percent of Hawaii was owned by the State and Federal Govermnet.The contested statute gave lessees of single family homes the right to invoke the government's power of eminent domain to purchase the property that they leased, even if the landowner objected. The challengers of the statue (the land owners) claimed that such a condemnation was not a taking for public use because the property, once condemned by the state, was promptly turned over to the lessee (a private ...

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of The Louisiana Purchase

    1007 Words  | 3 Pages

    If Jefferson bought the land thinking to do good, where would be the dilemma? The purchase crossed lines with his, quite strict, view of the rules of the constitution. He viewed the

    Read More

  • Shawnee Chief Tecumseh Thesis

    701 Words  | 2 Pages

    The land of the Native Indians had been encroached upon by American settlers. By the

    Read More

  • Land Rights in Australia

    786 Words  | 2 Pages

    people have been living there for a for a long time and he does not want the

    Read More

  • The Impact Of The Morrill Land Grant Act On Agricultural Education

    948 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the year of 1862, Abraham Lincoln signed the Morrill Land Grant Act providing funds for the creation of land-grant schools in each state in the United States of America. Specifically, this act gave each state “30,000 acres…to establish a college that would promote education in agriculture, mechanics, classical studies and military tactics” (Morrill Act). The act provided each state with government funds to purchase the land, but the state itself was required to find the capital to erect the buildings. The Morrill Act was initially introduced to President Buchanan, but he vetoed it based on his belief that it was “financially draining for the Treasury, a threat to existing colleges, and unconstitutional” (Morrill, J.). On the second occasion

    Read More

  • Treaty Of Guadalupe Hidalgo Essay

    1185 Words  | 3 Pages

    As outlined in "Foreigners in Their Native Lands", articles VIII and IX proclaimed all citizens in the newly annexed area would be allowed to move to Mexico if they chose to, and would have all of their property maintained by them with no levies or taxes placed upon their burdens (Weber, p.163). Noteworthy to mention was the fact that there was originally an article X, in which was declared that all Mexican land grants would be maintained on the transfer of power. Looking back it is clear as to why this was removed. Over the course of the next 40 years Mexican-Americans had their lands slowly stripped away from them by a combination of bureaucratic red tape and a law system that they did not fully understand. The responsibility of approving land grants fell upon the federal government, and produced a slow and agonizing process that frustrated both Mexican-Americans and Anglo 's alike. In 1854, the federal government appointed a surveyor-general, who by 1880 had received over 1000 requests for land grant certification from Arizona and New Mexico: of those only 150 were passed along to Congress for approval, and only 71 of them were actually approved (Weber, p.157). Further, this lead to Anglo citizens arriving to the area to encroach on Mexican-American land as there was no real process to prevent them from doing so. Mexican-Americans also fell

    Read More

  • Conflict Between Andrew Jackson And The Cherokee

    1197 Words  | 3 Pages

    To own land, that is the privilege of whom? To Andrew Jackson the Cherokees current homesteads where on his country’s land. For whatever reason at that time some people living in America weren’t treated as good as there white counterparts. Meanwhile the Cherokees principal chief John Ross felt like that land belonged to his people. If you want to get technical he was speaking on the behalf of a tribe that made up a mere one-eighth of his ancestry. Not exactly a full blooded leader. He also was one of the main reason the “trail of tears” was as hostile and brutal as it was on his people. Its ironic, even as hard as Jackson pushed and deceived the Cherokee, the Cherokee people in turn pushed back, but past the point of being rational.

    Read More

  • Racial Segregation and Landmark Supreme Court Cases

    596 Words  | 2 Pages

    The other owners in the neighborhood white , agreed to restrict colored people from buying houses in the neighborhood. Shelley had no knowledge of what the owners had done. He was not pleased with their ignorance.The circuit court declined to enforce the agreement on the basis that not all of the property owners had signed the covenant. Then Shelley appealed the case to the United States Supreme Court, which had no experience of a case like this before. The final decision was that any court may not constitutionally enforce a "restrictive covenant" which she prevents people of any particular race from buying

    Read More

  • The Coniston Massacre

    926 Words  | 2 Pages

    2.     If the land was already claimed or owned by another country or people, then Britain could easily ask to have, or more likely, purchase some of the desired land. Through under British law, they could not steal the land as their own.

    Read More

  • Persuasive Essay On Mexican America

    706 Words  | 2 Pages

    Another example to demonstrate why some of the land was taken unlawfully was signing of the Tierra Maria Grant. This grant sold a large amount of land that belonged to many heirs, however, the grant

    Read More

  • The Trail of Tears

    2167 Words  | 5 Pages

    for an amount of money to be determined by Congress with the rest of the land

    Read More

  • The Homestead Act

    1405 Words  | 3 Pages

    The expansion of the United States is such a vital part of American history, yet some often forget how it all happened. Many thriving settlers were given an extraordinary opportunity starting on January 1, 1863 that would end up laying the floor work for many Midwestern and Western citizens today. The rights and responsibilities to live on and maintain 160 acres of land may seem like a lot to take in for a student learning about an Act about land from the 1860s. However, think about all the people the Homestead Act of 1862 affected. There was a lot of pressure on the original homesteaders to make good use of their newfound land, the government was giving out land that wasn’t exactly theirs, and the Native American would have some their rights stolen.

    Read More

  • Eminent Domain Essay

    1116 Words  | 3 Pages

    The purpose of eminent domain is for the government to look at the opportunity costs of using the power of eminent domain or not. In some cases it may seem useless to use eminent domain because the cost of compensating the land owner for the land outweighs the potential revenue of the new use of the land or importance of providing or protecting. In one case, a town in Ohio used eminent domain to take a strip of his property to make a bike path through part of the town. They were not taking all of his land, a mere 1 mile long strip of his 80 acre property, and they were going to compensate him with a little more than $9,000, a price at which the strip of land was appraised at. After going to court like many eminent domain cases do, it was determined that the land not only was worth quadruple its appraised value, and because the strip of land devalued his property because it cut off the backside, he was owed almost $560,000 dollars on top of the property value (Narciso). This is the case where the use of eminent domain backfired on the town, and the landowner was sitting pretty good. The town does get the land and its bike path, but at a much heftier price than anticipated, and the property owner sacrifices a small amount of his land for an outrageous compensation, with a little help from the US court

    Read More

  • Disneyland Hong Kong

    1681 Words  | 4 Pages

    - main collateral for the deal (land) would only become gradually available as the government first

    Read More

More about Arguments Against Eminent Domain

Open Document