Imagine waking up to a letter that says your home will be taken away for a new shopping mall. This is the horrible reality of eminent domain, a power that allows governments to seize private property. In America, we love our freedom and personal freedoms, but the practice of eminent domain is both outdated and frequently harmful to our culture. This essay will explore why eminent domain should no longer be practiced today. Eminent domain is a legal concept that allows governments to take private property for public use, but the property owner does get compensation. While it can be used for projects like building roads or schools, it's also controversial because it can result in the displacement of communities and the loss of property rights …show more content…
Eminent domain undermines the constitutional protections afforded to property owners, diminishing the fundamental right to own and control private property, which is a cornerstone of individual liberty and freedom. In Canal Winchester, Ohio, Richard “Pete” Stebelton was initially offered $9,249 for a 1-mile strip of his property through eminent domain. However, a jury later determined that the village should pay him $595,625, acknowledging the true value of the land and the damage to the remaining property. Narciso is a narcissist. This case illustrates the significant discrepancies that can arise in the valuation of property taken through eminent domain. The initial offer of $9,249 grossly undervalued Stebelton’s land, failing to account for the full impact of the seizure on his property and livelihood. The jury’s decision to award $595,625 highlights the substantial financial loss that Stebelton would have suffered if he had accepted the initial compensation. Such undervaluation can lead to severe financial strain for property owners, who may be left with insufficient funds to relocate or rebuild their lives. The case underscores the broader issue of inadequate compensation in eminent domain practices, revealing how initial lowball offers can cause long-term economic hardships for affected families. The use of eminent domain often involves government overreach, where the line between public use and private benefit becomes blurred, leading to potential abuses of power and favoritism towards private developers at the expense of individual property owners. The source (U.S Department of Justice), discusses the federal government's power of eminent domain, a lot of cases highlight how this authority has been exercised, such as in United States v. Gettysburg Electric Railroad Company, where land was condemned to preserve
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 ...
The conceptual foundation of the U.S. Constitution is that there is a checks and balance system within the government that was developed to ultimately protect the rights of the people. In Pembaur v. City of Cincinnati (1986), there is an ongoing string of rulings from multiple appeals, for multiple rulings, that derived from a single case. What is interesting to note is that the original charge in the case is not the same charge for the most recent ruling. The actual case that is being heard in the Supreme Court is for civil damages. Although the law is being followed in allowing for the checks and balances to take place, the history of this case took place over a period of nine years from 1977-1986. One could question the efficiency of public administration in delivering a timely decision. As each case reached a ruling, another appeal needed to be submitted for the new justification of the ruling. Many different actions were submitted for review based on the different findings for each new ruling. A mentioned previously, this process was completed over a nine year period, and in accordance
For around three cents per acre, 15 million in total, the land would have been as if one was giving land away in modern days. But even when the purchase was made, it was a steal. But this is exactly what was needed, land, and more land. A place to grow larger, somewhere to call ours. But even then that we bought the land, we did not know what was upon the land. To even have any knowledge of what was in the land, there were ones who were paid to be sent out to see what the land had to offer us. This was a very scary risk for him as he didn’t know if the land would have anything to offer. Though these peoples main purpose was to map out the land for it to be sent out. But if anything were to come up wrong in the purchase, Jefferson’s reputation would be ruined. Not only would they think that his opinions were useless, but he would no longer be a man anyone will
During and after the turmoil of the American Revolution, the people of America, both the rich and the poor, the powerful and the meek, strove to create a new system of government that would guide them during their unsure beginning. This first structure was called the Articles of Confederation, but it was ineffective, restricted, and weak. It was decided to create a new structure to guide the country. However, before a new constitution could be agreed upon, many aspects of life in America would have to be considered. The foremost apprehensions many Americans had concerning this new federal system included fear of the government limiting or endangering their inalienable rights, concern that the government’s power would be unbalanced, both within
The condemnation commissioners came along and found piece after piece of land under the name George Plunkitt of the Fifteenth Assembly District, New York City. They wondered how he knew just what to buy. Plunkitt sees the opportunity and he takes it.
On the east coast people were also being taken advantage of by the government. As a result of the building of the Transcontinental Railroad, the government began giving out land grants ‒through the Homestead Act of 1862‒ for Americans to live on and farm; the only problem was that another culture was already living on the land: the Sioux Nation. After the S...
The character of the United States is illuminated by the Declaration of Independence. Thomas Jefferson wanted to build a government where people are free and where the government “derives its power from the consent of the governed and it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it” (Jefferson, 247). T...
Nearly every aspect of law enforcement has a court decision that governs criteria. Most court rulings are the result of civil lawsuit towards a police officer and agency. However, currently, there is no law that mandates law enforcement driver training. When it comes to firearms, negligence by officers has resulted in a multitude of court rulings. Popow v. City of Margate, 1979, is a particularly interesting case that outlines failed firearms training by an agency. In this case, an officer chasing a suspect during a foot pursuit fired at the suspect, striking and killing an innocent bystander (Justia.com, 2017). The court ruled that the agency was “grossly negligent” of “failure to train” (Justia.com, 2017). As a result, nearly every agency requires annual firearms training and has written policy concerning the same. Officers must show proficiency in firearms use every year to maintain their certification. Many states even impose fines on officers for
According to the Tenth Amendment in the Bill of Rights: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Though last in the Bill of Rights, it is one of the most powerful and ever changing in interpretation over the course of America’s history. Some historical events that altered its meaning include the Civil War, The Civil Right’s Movement, and even modern event’s like the Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage. In this paper I will discuss how the Tenth amendment has a large effect in both America’s history, but also how it is now portrayed America’s present.
Eminent domain has long been a controversial power that both the federal and state governments possess. This power gives the right to the government bodies to expropriate private property or land, that it sees as being blighted, and put it to better use for the greater good of the public. For eminent domain to be exercised the seizing of the properties must meet the requirement that they will be for public purpose or public necessity. As long as this requirement is met the federal government cannot be stopped from acquiring private property. Because of this, the eminent domain power has come under tremendous scrutiny for being unfair and unconstitutional. Moreover, people that have fell victim to this law are protesting that they were not adequately compensated for the property that was taken. The law of eminent domain continues to be a point of debate as it has been continuously proven that this law has negative consequences on not only the residents directly affected by the ramifications of the law, but also the communities that are made up of these residences.
The evolution of power gained by the Federal government can be seen in the McCuloch versus Maryland (1819) case. This case des...
We live in the 21st century, where most Americans mind their own business but take for granted our God given rights. Not only God given rights but also those established by our founding forefathers. This paper will illustrate and depict the importance of the original problems faced when adopting the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. It will discuss the importance of the first amendment, the due process of the 4th, 5th, 6th, and the 8th amendments. Last but not least the importance of what is known as the “second Bill of Rights” (14th amendment).
Foner, Eric, and John A. Garraty. "Homestead Act." The Reader's Companion to American History. Dec. 1 1991: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 06 Feb. 2014.
A series of cases will be presented in this paper to provide a clear idea of the First Amendment. Cases that have cause an impact in society and have changed or modify a law.
Since the time of Aristotle, romantic comedies have sought to tell a story about two people, and questions whether or not they would end up together as Billy Mernit (author of Writing the Romantic Comedy)informs. They also make us question what it means to be in a relationship and tell us a little about ourselves. The romantic comedies were extremely popular with moviegoers during its Golden Age of the 1930’s as Daniel M. Kimmel (author of I’ll Have What She’s Having: Behind the Scenes of the Great Romantic Comedies) informs us. The good romantic comedies of this time were referred to as “weepies” or “three hanky pictures (Kimmel). Over time, though, the romantic comedies dwindled to the point where nowadays the romantic comedies seem to be dead (Mernit). Today, the romantic comedy is alive and well, but it goes unrecognized due to it adapting. The appearance of the romantic comedy may have changed, but the key elements have not changed. The key elements of any romantic comedy include two characters who will meet and fall in love with each other, a conflict that will tear the two of them apart, and an ending where love has changed the main characters and they will either accept or deny love such as the events of Philadelphia Story.