billroper: (Default)
[personal profile] billroper
Just so that we have in front of us the thing that we're discussing in my previous post, I went out and dug this up from a copy of the Constitution:

Amendment V.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


Seems clear to me. Your mileage may vary if you're a Supreme Court Justice.

Date: 2005-06-24 04:50 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] rmeidaking.livejournal.com
The key phrase appears to be "Without just compensation."

The government *can* take the land they want; they just have to pay the market rate for it. My thought on the Connecticut case is that the land in question may have increased astronomically in value.

Certain of my cousins in northern lower Michigan successfully stalled a major highway (US 131 north of Reed City) this way. Depending on who is telling the tale, they either re-routed the highway, certain cousins got a lot of money for their land, or both, before the highway got built.

I recently discovered that a certain branch of my ancestral tree was uprooted from New Jersey by the British during the Revolution; they resettled in Delaware County, New York, and two generations later, they were displaced by the reservoir for New York City.

Face it; in America, we rent the land for the price of property taxes. The government effectively owns it all.

Date: 2005-06-28 04:54 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] backrubbear.livejournal.com
The problem with "Just compensation" is that you can be justly compensated for the land you may own but you may not make enough from the transaction to be able to live at the same level of comfort of amenities afterwards.

(brought to you by a run-on sentence.)

Profile

billroper: (Default)
billroper

June 2025

S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 161718192021
22232425262728
2930     

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 17th, 2025 04:03 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios
OSZAR »