Another Way to Fight Eminent Domain Abuse
“The N.C. House of Representatives has approved a proposal to amend the state constitution by adding the following language:
Private property shall not be taken by eminent domain except for a public use. Just compensation shall be paid and shall be determined by a jury at the request of either party.
As I’ve pointed out in a previous “Legal Update,” this proposed amendment is much too weak to protect North Carolina property owners effectively from eminent domain abuse.
It is weak when compared to the model amendments that have been developed by property rights advocates, including the John Locke Foundation; it is weak when compared to the actual amendments that have been adopted in other states, including South Carolina and Virginia; and it adds very little to the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause (“nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation”), which we already know — thanks to the Supreme Court’s 2005 decision in Kelo v. City of New London — can be interpreted in ways that make it ineffectual.
Prior to the vote, Rep. Larry Pittman, R-Cabarrus, proposed adding the phrase, “Public use does not include the taking of property for the purpose of thereafter conveying an interest in the property to a third party for economic development,” which would have significantly strengthened the amendment. Unfortunately, the House rejected his suggestion and passed the bill in its original form.
As a result, responsibility for turning the amendment into something that will effectively protect the property owners of North Carolina now rests with the N.C. Senate. It seems unlikely that senators will be willing to add the kind of restrictive language that has just been rejected in the House. However, as I will explain below, there is another approach to strengthening the amendment that the Senate might find more acceptable.”
Guze, Jon. Carolina Journal Online 17 February 2015.