“Trump Supports Taking Private Property Of Citizens”
Eminent domain laws are a double edge sword.
As conservatives or libertarians, we would be violently
opposed to the government taking ANY property.
On the other hand, lets say you have a tar paper shack on the bank of a river, and that location is the only logical spot where an interstate bridge can be built.
Do you cancel the bridge to save the shack?
Inquiring minds want to know. ;)
This isn’t about an interstate bridge which would fall under the Constitution’s grant of postal roads. This is abuse of eminent domain to benefit one private business over the private property of another individual. That is far different than legitimate infrastructure, that is corruption, pure and simple.
“On the other hand, lets say you have a tar paper shack on the bank of a river, and that location is the only logical spot where an interstate bridge can be built.
Do you cancel the bridge to save the shack?
Inquiring minds want to know. ;)”
Other than a few Objectivists, I think that most of us here are happy to see the Constitution followed...which gives the government the right to take that shack - provided they are compensated justly and the land is for public use (i.e., NOT FOR A PRIVATE TOLL ROAD), such as an interstate. Our problem is when well-connected campaign donors get to build a marina and a hotel on that land...there’s just something unjust there - or maybe it’s me.
What does that have to do with what Trump said?
"...government wants to build a tremendous economic development,...
A bridge is one thing. THAT is a public use item. That is legitimate Eminent Domain use. But a development? For companies? To improve a tax base? Not even close.