---

The Eminent Domain Act is Unconstitutional. Our Government Feels Justified in Taking Privately Owned Property to Use for Their Own Purposes of Revenue Generation.  

---

The Eminent Domain Act gives local, state and federal governments the power to absorb private property for public use regardless of the actual owner’s preference.

It also gives this same power to other organizations such as highway commissions, airports, utility companies, and any individual who has been granted financial aid from the federal government for a funded project.

The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution states that owners of private property are entitled to receive fair and just compensation for any property that is confiscated in the name of eminent domain.

---

---

Connecticut Ruling

The Fourteenth Amendment goes on to state that property owners are guaranteed compensation on the state level as well.

Property taken from individuals can only be done so if it’s going to benefit the interests of the general public.

As well, property can only be taken when government prerequisites have been met and when the project has been fully planned.

The Eminent Domain Act has been deemed fair by governments but this is far removed from what is actually taking place.

Advocates for the rights and freedoms of Americans believe that eminent domain is just another way for the government to take what they want, when they want.

Although much of the property that has been taken by the government may have been fair and legitimate, far more often individuals find themselves at the losing end, with no legal support to back them up in the courts.

---

Defining “Public Good”

Under the Eminent Domain Act the government can take your private property and make it theirs to use for building a new school or road.

But did you also know that they can claim your property if they’re able to prove that they’re doing so for “public good”? But just what is public good and who defines it?

For years now cities around the United States have been using eminent domain to force home and land owners off their property so expensive offices and homes can be built.

The only public good in this is that the city will get to collect more in property taxes than they have been collecting before.

And what happens to the property owners who are forced to give up their home or property?

Eminent domain dictates that the government must pay those property owners a fair market value.

But home owners are starting to fight back and the government is sticking to its right to use the Eminent Domain Act despite being challenged.

---

Fighting Against Eminent Domain

Even though eminent domain means people will be paid a fair market value for their home, many of these home owners don’t want to sell at the prices being offered to them.

In 2003, just outside of Cleveland, Ohio, the quiet neighborhood of Lakewood was threatened with being bulldozed to make way for expensive condominiums.

However, Jim and Joanne Saleet refused to sell the house they had lived in for the last 38 years.

Madeleine Cain, at that time the mayor of Lakewood, was determined to tear down the Saleet’s home, as well as 55 other homes, four apartment buildings, and several businesses.

Cain’s reason for being so determined? She wanted to build expensive condos and a fancy shopping mall so the property tax base of Lakewood would increase.

As Cain told 60 Minutes in 2003, ‘This is about Lakewood’s future. Lakewood cannot survive without a strengthened tax base. Is it right to consider this a public good? Absolutely”.

In order to force the sale of the Saleet’s home, and other Lakewood homes, the city certified that the Lakewood area was “blighted”.

The city of Lakewood defined what ‘blighted’ meant, and it wasn’t as simple as homes not being painted or in disrepair.

The definition of blighted, according to the Lakewood, was any house that didn’t have three bedrooms, two baths, central.

---

Protecting the Constitution

The Saleets turned to Dana Berliner and Scott Bullock, attorneys for The Institute for Justice, a libertarian nonprofit organization, who filed in court on behalf of the Saleets.

They stated that taking away the private property of the Saleets was unconstitutional and couldn’t happen if the courts wanted to uphold the Constitution.

According to Berliner the Eminent Domain Act was allowing this to happen all across the United States. Scott Bullock added more by saying:

“It’s fundamentally wrong, and contrary to the Constitution for the government to take property from one private owner, and hand it over to another private owner, just because the government thinks that person is going to make more productive use of the land.”

– Scott Bullock, The Institute for Justice, 2003

Jim and Joanne Saleet, after a long court battle, won the fight against Lakewood to keep their home.

It shouldn’t even be called a “win” because all they really did was fight for their Constitutional right to keep what was already rightfully theirs.

---

---