Quote:
Quote by: Mr. Jaggers  The taking of property by eminent domain for public use is subject to the limitation due process and payment of just compensation under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments; but “public use” has never been narrowly circumscribed to what only the public may use. Eminent domain is nothing new; it happens almost every time a new Wal*Mart goes up in Yourtown, USA. Indeed, history is replete with examples of the government taking private property and transferring it, either by licence or in fee, to corporations and commercial entities for such use as deemed in the public interest. The building of the railroads in the 19th century as well as urban renewal and redevelopment today have been accomplished through the power of eminent domain; and, if exercised within the constraints of the Constitution, it is lawful. |
While I somewhat agree, the argument doesn't even have to reach this point.
Most federal parks were federal land already and are merely designated as parks. Some were other types of public land and became parks, and some were donated for parks. I can't find one instance where the federal government had to use eminent domain condemnation to create a park.
Quote:
|
Quote by: Chancellor Where does the amendment say the government has the right to condemn property? |
Are you really going to go down this road? The 5th Amendment allows for eminent domain takings for public use so long as there is "just compensation"
Since you're so against eminent domain, why don't you tell me how an interstate highway is built without it?