The Wall Street Journal
Some states passed laws restricting eminent domain for economic development. But as local governments, park systems and state agencies become bolder about seizing property for recreational use, don’t be surprised if the next eminent-domain case with national significance involves a bike path in your backyard.
_________________________________________________________________________We’re from the government and we’re here to build a bike path
Op-ed by Steven Malanga, includes
Op-ed by Steven Malanga, includes
“The practice of government taking land for recreational uses—typically bike lanes, hiking paths and fashionable ‘rail trails’ and ‘greenways’—is spreading across the country, marking a sharp and troubling expansion of eminent domain. … Over the years, the Supreme Court has consistently expanded what is considered a ‘public good’ to justify government seizures. …”
The Takings Clause of the Constitution’s Fifth Amendment grants government the authority to seize property to be used for the public good, as long as government pays “just compensation” to the owner. Over the years, the Supreme Court has consistently expanded what is considered a “public good” to justify government seizures. In 2005, for instance, the high court upheld the taking of Susette Kelo’s waterfront home by the city of New London, Conn., so that a local development corporation could build high-end condos and a hotel. The redevelopment was intended to boost property values and increase municipal tax revenues.
