The Right and Power of Eminent Domain in the National Government

Eminent domain, or the expropriation of private property, is among the most controversial of legal arrangements. The challenges and threats that it poses to private property make it the subject of debate and dispute. Surprisingly, however, most Western jurisdictions embrace a similar formula to address expropriation, both in terms of the purposes that justify such action and the compensation that should be awarded to property owners.This article challenges the prevailing eminent domain formula, according to which, regardless of the circumstances of the expropriation, compensation to the property owner is determined by reference to the market value of the property. By exploring the case of Israel's 2005 disengagement plan, as a result of which 21 residential communities were uprooted by expropriation, this article argues that loss of communality should be taken into account in expropriations that uproot entire communities. However, in order for the legal arrangement to be efficient, fair and, of no less importance, to reflect the values embodied in the right to property, it should be constituted within a normative infrastructure that takes into account the values that the society wishes to endorse, and the inner meaning of these values.

Download Full-text

The Nexus between Sovereignty and ‘Eminent Domain’ under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and the Land Act, 2013

Social Change ◽

10.1177/0049085718768897 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 48 (2) ◽

pp. 173-187

Author(s):

Meenakshi Gogoi

Keyword(s):

Eminent Domain ◽

The State ◽

Land Acquisition ◽

Sovereign Power ◽

Public Purpose ◽

Land Acquisitions ◽

The People ◽

Indian State ◽

Fair Compensation ◽

The Right

The Indian state has used the colonial Land Acquisition Act (LAA), 1894, for acquiring land even without the consent of the people in the name of ‘public purpose’ and on payment of compensation, until it got repealed by a new act, the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisitions, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The LAA, 1894 is an expression of the notion of ‘eminent domain’ and draws its sustenance from the sovereignty of the state. The understanding of sovereignty and to what extent the sovereign power of the state can use the concept of ‘eminent domain’ in the context of land acquisition remains a contentious issue. This article attempts to examine the notion of sovereignty and use of ‘eminent domain’ in the context of land acquisition in India. How does the inter-relationship between sovereignty and ‘eminent domain’ be understood according to the LAA, 1894 and the Land Act, 2013 has been discussed.

Download Full-text

Enforcement in Equity of Conditions Precedent to the Exercise of the Right of Eminent Domain

Columbia Law Review ◽

10.2307/1110485 ◽

1910 ◽

Vol 10 (3) ◽

pp. 244

Keyword(s):

Eminent Domain ◽

The Right

Download Full-text

5. Fiscal federalism

Federalism: A Very Short Introduction ◽

10.1093/actrade/9780190900052.003.0005 ◽

2019 ◽

pp. 61-73

Author(s):

Mark J. Rozell ◽

Clyde Wilcox

Keyword(s):

Local Governments ◽

Fiscal Federalism ◽

National Government ◽

State Spending ◽

Federal Grants ◽

Average Operating ◽

State Policymaking ◽

The Republic ◽

State And Local ◽

The Right

“Fiscal federalism” describes how during the early decades of the republic, Congress gave states money to help pay for new roads and canals, to support their militia, and to build colleges and universities. But the system of granting money to the states grew in the twentieth century, especially after the Sixteenth Amendment gave the national government the right to impose an income tax in 1913. The chapter discusses the federal grants program, which now provides about 30 percent of the average operating revenues of state and local governments. It also considers how the national government uses mandates to influence state policymaking, how states raise revenue through taxation, and the differences in state spending programs.

Download Full-text

Mining and Irrigation

The Colorado State Constitution ◽

10.1093/oso/9780190907723.003.0016 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 329-338

Author(s):

Richard B. Collins ◽

Dale A. Oesterle ◽

Lawrence Friedman

Keyword(s):

Health And Safety ◽

Eminent Domain ◽

The State ◽

Public Ownership ◽

Beneficial Use ◽

Natural Stream ◽

Private Power ◽

The Right

This chapter addresses Article XVI of the Colorado Constitution, which deals with mining and irrigation. Mining and agriculture were Colorado’s principal industries in 1876, so provisions relating to both, and to irrigation in particular, were major subjects of discussion at the convention. Section 2 requires laws to protect the health and safety of miners and prohibits employment in mines of children under twelve. Sections 3 and 4 authorize statutes to regulate drainage of mines and to provide for teaching mining and metallurgy in “institutions of learning” supported by the state. The article’s celebrated Sections 5 and 6 assert public ownership of the unappropriated water of every natural stream and establish the right to appropriate the water of any stream for a beneficial use. Section 7 confers a private power of eminent domain for rights-of-way to convey water.

Download Full-text