Either term is generally acceptable when referring to North American people indigenous to the United States — although some individuals may have a preference, and others may feel being called "Indian" is inappropriate or even offensive. But as some experts and scholars point out, however, "American Indian" refers specifically to the aboriginal peoples of the lower 48 states — while "Native American" includes Alaska Natives as well. First Nations generally refers to tribal groups indigenous to Canada — it is generally considered incorrect to refer to U. The term "American Indian" is generally preferred by news media and many academic environments when referencing Native peoples of the lower 48 states.
This entry explores various conceptualizations of eminent domain and its background and then discusses controversies surrounding its key components.
Related concepts to eminent domain exist in other countries with common law systems. In the United Kingdom, New Zealand, and the Republic of Ireland, a similar procedure is called compulsory purchase, and in Australia it is called resumption.
In Canada and Louisiana, a concept similar to eminent domain is expropriation. Governments, however, must use due process to appropriate the property, often taking private property through a condemnation proceeding.
Government can take property only for public uses, and it must compensate the property owner. The courts usually defer to the legislative branch in deciding what a public use is.
In the United States, it is without controversy that governments possess an inherent power to exercise eminent domain but that due process must be followed beforehand. Experts conceptualize four kinds of property takings: A temporary taking means the owner is compensated for temporary loss of the property, but the property eventually returns to the owner.
Contemporary controversies surrounding eminent domain revolve around what are legitimate public uses and what is fair compensation. The notion of a legitimate public use has changed dramatically over time, from a notion of universal availability, to a definite, direct public benefit, and more recently, to a potential, indirect public benefit.
Supreme Court cases, Kohl et al. United States, 91 U. Decided inthe Supreme Court concluded that the federal government could appropriate private property in Cincinnati, Ohio, to develop a building that would house a federal post office, courthouse, pension office, customhouse, and other federal government facilities.
In this instance, the Court was concerned with the potential access of all Americans to these public properties. Eventually, the focus of legitimate public use was less on universal access and more on the interest of the public. It became no longer necessary that everyone have access to the property but rather that everyone would benefit from the property.
Supreme Court considered whether the District of Columbia Redevelopment Land Agency could use its powers of eminent domain to take blighted property in Washington, D. They may indeed make living an almost insufferable burden. Notably, in the case Susette Kelo, et al. City of New London, Connecticut, et al.
Supreme Court decided a city could appropriate private property for a public purpose, even if that private property is turned over to private developers whose ultimate aims may or may not result in fulfilling a public purpose.
Rather than condemning the property to build a public facility as in the Kohl case, or condemning a building because of public health concerns as in the Berman case, the New London city government wanted to appropriate the private property and then sell it to real estate companies, who would then develop the property.
Two public purposes were to result from this transaction: Supreme Court previously did hold that economic development is a public purpose for which condemnation proceedings are legitimate.
An important difference in the Kelo case is that government was conveying the private property to a private developer, whose objectives only indirectly put the property to a public use.
The public purpose that would be served would be economic development and an increase in tax revenue. Logically, the Kelo case stands for the proposition that government can legitimately force a family to convey their home to a private entity that promises but cannot guarantee economic development and consequent tax revenue.
Another reason the Kelo case is controversial is that the city government of New London used condemnation proceedings against homes that were not dilapidated but were in a working-class neighborhood that, by all accounts, was not blighted. Some members of the New London neighborhood had assented to purchase of their property by the City of New London, but other neighborhood residents had not.
Not surprisingly, hostile responses to the Kelo case were swift and strong.
House of Representatives inhas since languished in the Senate. If it ever becomes law, it would prevent local governments from receiving economic development funds to use for eminent domain proceedings for private development.Eminent Domain | Spring Inside the Vault Lesson Plan THE Eminent Domain: Should Private Property Be Taken for Public Use?
LEsson PLan An Economic Education Newsletter from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
and Public Policy at Washington University in St. Louis, and was. Creating the Dudley Street Neighborhood Initiative and Strengthening Community Voice In the early s, the Riley Foundation, a small, Boston-based family foundation, was looking for ways to refocus their grant making.
Early Evolution of Eminent Domain Cases. The s brought a flurry of land acquisition cases in support of New Deal policies that aimed to resettle impoverished farmers, build large-scale irrigation projects, and establish new national parks.
Eminent Domain Business The ancient right, for the government to take property from an individual with out consent for a common good is called Eminent Domain. Some examples of a common good are, to build a dam, an airport, a hospital or a highway. This is an Essay assignment from Business Law class Plz complete in proper Essay format!
Needs References too! Define eminent domain. Main Section – Historical Perspective: 1. Nationalization by Hugo Chavez in Venezuela Using this service is LEGAL and IS NOT prohibited by any university/college policies. The "Shift to Privatization" in Land Conservation: A Cautionary Essay Leigh Raymond Leigh Raymond & Sally K.
Fairfax,The "Shift to Privatization" in Land Conservation: A Cautionary Essay, 42Nat. Resources J degree to which these new policies indicate a "shift to privatization".