The use of eminent domain by the Federal Government has become a pretty much accepted fact of life in America. If the government sees a need and wants your property to accomplish a goal, your property is taken away. That may or may not be exactly what the framers of the Constitution had in mind. Up until now, the Democrats had no trouble with it because their view of government is that it always knows best. Now, look what they are saying. OMG.
As Written By Jazz Shaw for Hot Air:
We all know by now that the President’s opponents, primarily Democrats, are firmly opposed to strengthening security on the southern border by constructing the long promised wall. While this should really be a disqualifier in terms of holding office, the partisan divide is what it is, as the kids like to say. So be it. There are some reasonable arguments to be made in that regard, particularly in terms of the cost. Any such plan must be paid for and fiscal conservatives should insist on that. Logistical questions as to how much of it should be physical and what role electronic surveillance and other measures should be employed are also worthy of debate.
There is a serious question on the table right now regarding how Washington would obtain all the land required to build the wall. Much of it, particularly in Texas, is owned by either the states or private landholders. If they refuse to sell the land for fair compensation, the use of eminent domain may be required. Ten Democrats are seeking to introduce a bill which would forbid that action for purposes of building the wall, and now a new argument is being put forth in support of that effort. Enlisted to make the pitch is constitutional law professor Gerald S. Dickinson. This week he seeks to shame any conservatives who might support the wall by insisting that any federal use of eminent domain to secure the lands needed for construction would be against the wishes of the…..
KEEP READING THERE IS MORE HERE: