Removal for Public Health of Dams by Police Power or Eminent Domain

1912 ◽  
Vol 25 (6) ◽  
pp. 551
1927 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. 624-629
Author(s):  
William Anderson
Keyword(s):  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Luscombe ◽  
Alexander McClelland

The Policing the Pandemic Mapping Project was launchedon 4 April, 2020 to track and visualize these massive andextraordinary expansions of police power and the unequalpatterns of enforcement they are likely to produce. In doingso, we hope that we can bring to light patterns of policeintervention, to help understand who is being targeted, whatjustifications are being used by police, and how marginalizedpeople are being impacted. More broadly, we hope theproject will inform a larger conversation about the role ofpolicing in society, to scrutinize public health and policecollaboration, and to focus attention toward the harms ofcriminalization. Having an understanding of these patterns incoming weeks will help inform approaches to actively resistthe logic and practices of policing crisis and disease, ratherthan allow them to become widespread and normalized.Through the acts of identifying, reporting, and visualizingevents related to the policing of COVID-19, the projectoffers a living repository of publicly accessible data that canbe used by activists, academics, journalists, and communitymembers to analyze, discuss, and challenge the policing ofdisease. We encourage all people to use the data availablethrough this project in any way they wish.


Author(s):  
Richard Adelstein

This chapter shows how government constrains ownership in pursuing its objectives, considers the police power and eminent domain as alternative ways of achieving them in light of the dispute between Locke and Bentham, and introduces a central concept of the book, involuntary exchange. Exercising its police power, government may destroy the value of property without compensation, but eminent domain takings require that owners be paid full compensation for their loss. Eminent domain thus governs involuntary exchanges, compelled sales of property to government at a price equal to the replacement value of the property taken, and constitutes an organizational midpoint between markets and liability as institutions to govern exchange. The Supreme Court’s problematic attempts to distinguish between the two powers, and determine when a taking has been for public use, are considered, and two modern scholarly attempts to address the takings question, one Benthamite and one Lockean, are compared.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document