Domain Infringes on Personal Property Rights: Damage to Securing Stable Growth in Sovereign Nations, while Bolstering Developing Nations
Thesis Statement: Eminent domain infringes on personal property rights and can damage secure stable growth for sovereign nations, while bolstering developing nations.
In the Unites States the Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution imposes limitations on the exercise of eminent domain. In a landmark eminent domain case that was presented to the US Supreme Court in 2005, the limitations have been greatly expanded giving the federal, state and local government the ability to take private land and then sell it to private developers. Eminent domain has always been a tool at the government’s disposal and was used to establish things like the transcontinental railroad. Eminent domain, as described by the Constitution, states that the government must use the land for public use. The public uses clause has been broadened over the years. The United States is not the only country that allows for eminent domain, although called different things the principals are the same. Countries such as the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, Canada, South Africa, etc. all allow for land to be taken for “the greater good”. The laws and protections vary greatly. I plan to look at some of the benefits of Eminent Domain as well as the many downsides of eminent domain. I will explore several sovereign nations and how eminent domain has helped and hindered growth, private property rights, and the true cost of exercising eminent domain. I will also explore the use of eminent domain in developing countries, and contrast that to developing countries who have strict law pertaining to property rights.
The United States Constitution. (1787, September). Constitutional Convention.
Retrieved February 7, 2012 from http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html
KELO et al. v. CITY OF NEW LONDON et al. (2005, 23 June). Supreme Court.
Retrieved February 8, 2012 from http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=000&invol=04-108
In the Unites States the Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution imposes limitations on the exercise of eminent domain. In a landmark eminent domain case that was presented to the US Supreme Court in 2005, the limitations have been greatly expanded giving the federal, state and local government the ability to take private land and then sell it to private developers. Eminent domain has always been a tool at the government’s disposal and was used to establish things like the transcontinental railroad. Eminent domain, as described by the Constitution, states that the government must use the land for public use. The public uses clause has been broadened over the years. The United States is not the only country that allows for eminent domain, although called different things the principals are the same. Countries such as the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, Canada, South Africa, etc. all allow for land to be taken for “the greater good”. The laws and protections vary greatly. I plan to look at some of the benefits of Eminent Domain as well as the many downsides of eminent domain. I will explore several sovereign nations and how eminent domain has helped and hindered growth, private property rights, and the true cost of exercising eminent domain. I will also explore the use of eminent domain in developing countries, and contrast that to developing countries who have strict law pertaining to property rights.
The United States Constitution. (1787, September). Constitutional Convention.
Retrieved February 7, 2012 from http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html
KELO et al. v. CITY OF NEW LONDON et al. (2005, 23 June). Supreme Court.
Retrieved February 8, 2012 from http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=000&invol=04-108