40 States to Review eminent domain

[BigFatKen]

fee simple
n. absolute title to land, free of any other claims against the title, which one can sell or pass to another by will or inheritance. This is a redundant form of "fee," but is used to show the fee (absolute title) is not a "conditional fee," or "determinable fee," or "fee tail." Like "fee" it is often used in deeds transferring title, as in "Harry Hadit grants to Robert Gotit title in fee simple…" or similar words.
online meaning.............little help

 

[CatsDieNow]

There's always ways to get around the restrictions.

Here in DFW, one of cities did a land grab for a shopping mall, and to get around the "public use" problem they simply put a public road through the middle of the property.

To get ranches, they simply incorported them into the city and tax them into selling.

 

[carpettbaggerr]

My property does not belong to the government. My house, my car, and my weapons are not on loan from the state, waiting to be recalled. This stuff is mine until I decide to part with it of my own free will.

If you don't pay your property taxes, what do you think will happen?

The State owns your property, and if you don't pay your rent, you will be forcibly evicted. If you resist, you will certainly be imprisoned, and possibly be killed.

The land of the Free, indeed.

 

[publius]

When you think about it, I think that cities have a point about taking care of slums/blighted lands. But it's an entirely different point when you start talking about homes that can't be legally condemned by an inspector mearly peering in the door. I understand that in many of those cases that the city was able to bribe the owners of the property into selling legitamitly. In other cases you had properties where the owners couldn't be found or there were violations like failure to pay property taxes where they took the property that way.

That bridge was crossed in 1954, IIRC. The majority opinion in Kelo relied upon the precedent set when an established store, in good condition and profitable, was seized under eminent domain because it was in a slum, and redeveloping the entire slum was the "public use" served by the government action. The increase in value and employment which will result from a planned economy serve the public use every bit as much as a public road, for example, or so the story goes. Read it for yourself, if you are not already too nauseated.

 

[publius]

Sorry folks. But none of us really own our land. Do a search on the term "Fee Simple" to understand.

And oy, but we have that eminent domain BS over here too.

Al, I can call the Sheriff to kick people out of here. The State will protect my title to my land. It sure seems like I own it in a lot of ways...

I have the same question for you and for horge: can you think of a better system? Everyone wants roads, and we want some government buildings and things for public use. Sometimes, in order to have a functional government infrastructure, eminent domain will be necessary, IMHO. I just wish this had been the majority opinion in Kelo.

 

[Kodiaz]

Well after 70 odd years of abusing the 2nd amendment. They've started to infringe on the rest of our rights. Maybe they should call it the Bill of privileges and make it official. I'm not saying this is a Republican thing, the Dems. would be no better. This is a govt. problem, it is too big now and is hungry for more and more power.

 

[vynx]

NO one ever owns the land - if you think you do try burying waste or digging a tunnel to China - or diggin up your lot and selling the dirt - not allowed.

What you do own is more valuable it is "A bundle of rights" to a certain area. It does not extend down to the center of the earth or outward to the moon.

Often it does not include "mining" rights or "water" rights or "mineral -oil" rights

A "bundle of rights" is the only correct answer. If I learned one thing as a Real Estate Major in college it was that - there is no other answer allowed.

What these rights consist of is the issue at stake here. The federal eminent domain issue will say you do NOT have the right to unlimited use and sole decision making about your occupation right to your "land" (land is not a good word to use think GPS positions).

I think the bundle of rights should begin with right to Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness which the federal eminent domain ruling seems to invalidate.

 

[PCGS65]

Well after 70 odd years of abusing the 2nd amendment. They've started to infringe on the rest of our rights. Maybe they should call it the Bill of privileges and make it official. I'm not saying this is a Republican thing, the Dems. would be no better. This is a govt. problem, it is too big now and is hungry for more and more power.

+1 well put Kodiaz. It's like cancer.