Eminent Domain

When it comes to constitutional debatable topics there are many that come to mind. A few are the legalization of marijuana, same sex marriage or even your take on the stand your ground law. One that sticks out to me in particular is Eminent Domain and the cases that have been involved in it. Eminent Domain also known in other countries as compulsory purchase in the UK and Ireland or resumption/compulsory acquisition in Australia and expropriation in South Africa and Canada. Eminent Domain is “The power to take private property for public use by a state, municipality, or private person or corporation authorized to exercise functions of public character, following the payment of just compensation to the owner of that property” (Free Dictionary). Meaning that the government at any level can take property or regulate it by using their Police Power.

The concept of eminent domain has a long history which is one of the reasons why the Fifth Amendment was put into place. This amendment established “Just Compensation” which was needed to help please the private property owners who had their property taken without any compensation. The fifth amendment by U.S. constitution requires that just compensation be paid when private property is taken for public use. “The power of eminent domain was created to authorize the government or the condemning authority, called the condemnor, to conduct a compulsory sale of property for the common welfare, such as health or safety” (Free Dictionary). It is used for the advancement of the area for what is needed but it could leave a burden financially on the property owner which is why just compensation was put in to place.

For eminent domain to be utilized there are four components that must be met. The four points are private property, must be taken, for public use, and with just compensation. If these four elements are not met then the act is considered unconstitutional. With the proper compensation eminent domain is perfectly fine...