Recently there has been a rash of news regarding the use and abuse of the government's eminent domain power. Governments (usually local city governments, but at times the state & federal governments) have the right (according to the fifth ammendment of the constitution) to seize privately owned land. This has two caveats. First, the owner of the land must be duly compensated, and second, the land must be put toward a public use. Here is where the controversy lies.
A public use is usually something like a park or a highway that is truly publicly owned. More recently, however, governments have come under fire for seizing land in order to build posh developments, shopping malls, golf courses, etc. The theory behind all this is that the higher tax base will also serve the public interest. Last year, the Supreme Court upheld the right of governments to abuse their eminent domain powers in this way (I still think that this case will be the Dredd Scott of our time, and that the high court will ultimately have to reverse itself on that one).
In today's news, I found an interesting article about a novel use of the eminent domain power. It seems the government of the city of Hercules, California wants to use eminent domain in order to stop a Wal-Mart from putting a store in their town. I've actually been to Hercules, and to be honest with you, I don't understand why they would do such a thing. This is a town that is literally a stop off of Interstate 80. They supposedly have good schools, but there's not much else going on there. I would think that a Wal-Mart would be a welcome addition there, as it would increase the tax revenue to the town.
| Permalink
Del.icio.us |
Digg This | 
Reddit | 
StumbleUpon | 
Facebook
Subscribe to this blog's feed