69 million page views

Re: Eminent domain

Reader comment on item: The Forcible Removal of Israelis from Gaza

Submitted by Gideon Kanner (United States), Apr 11, 2005 at 20:40

Two out of three instances of use of eminent domain your correspondnets mention present no problem, since they are land takings for public uses as specified in the 5th Amendment.
Even as I write, the US Supreme Court is considering Kelo v. New London (argued on February 22d) where the issue is whether New London can take by eminent domain an entire 90-acre neighborhood, then lease it for $1 per year for 99 years to a private developer who hopes to make a lot of money and by a trickle down theory have some of that money work its way down into the community in the form of taxes and wages for new jobs. The question is: is that "public use."
American press reportage on the use of eminent domain in Israel is a whole other painful strory. But that's for another time.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2023 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)