Eminent Domain and the Constitution of The United State

Amendment V.

"No person shell be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor hall any person be ubject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb, nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness aginst himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shell private property be taken for public use without just compensation. Ratified effective December 15, 1791"

What is eminent domain? How is it defined?

Eminent domain, broadly understood, is the power of the state to seize private property without the owner's consent. Historically, the most common uses of property taken by eminent domain are public facilities, highways, and railroads. Traditionally the power of eminent domain has been exercised for the construction of large public projects, but its use is beginning to be broadened to projects involving not "public use" but "public benefit". The decision in Kelo v. City of New London, a case that came before the US Supreme Court in 2004, set a precedent for property to be transferred to a private owner for the purpose of economic development. The court found that if an economic project creates new jobs, increases tax and other city revenues, and revitalizes a depressed or blighted urban area it qualifies as a public use.

This expands on a prior decision in Berman v. Parker (1954) which argued that the problems of large-scale urban blight need to be addressed with large-scale redevelopment plans and that land can be confiscated, and transferred to a private entity for a clearly defined public use. Since the Kelo decision, many states have passed regulations limiting the use of eminent domain to clearly proscribed limits. To this date, New York is not one of these states.

Are owners of condemned properties compensated?

The Fifth Amendment to the U.S Constitution forbids the confiscation of property "without just compensation", so that anyone whose property is acquired does receive some compensation. However, this is decided not by direct negotiation between prospective developer and current owner but by the government agency, which frequently leads to compensation packages that are inadequate.