Grantham University Wk 4 The Eminent Domain Discussion – Assignment Help

Save Time On Research and Writing
Hire a Pro to Write You a 100% Plagiarism-Free Paper

Need help with my Political Science question – I’m studying for my class.

Each week, you will be asked to respond to the prompt or prompts in the discussion forum. Your initial post should be 75-150 words in length, and is due on Sunday. By Tuesday, you should respond to two additional posts from your peers.

Eminent domain is a hotly contested topic in the United States. Typically, opponents see it as an unjust taking by the government, and supporters state it is needed to serve the public interest. This week, research a recent example of Eminent Domain cases or issues, and discuss the merits and implications.

Additionally, border walls and the construction of such walls is a highly polarized issue right now. Regardless of its merit, the topic does bring up an interesting legal question when using eminent domain. Discuss if you believe, based on the law, using eminent domain is allowable for the construction of border walls.

Lastly, have you or anyone in your family every experienced an eminent domain taking at the local, state or federal level? If so, what was the outcome?

View your discussion rubric.

Margie Anderson

Week 4 Discussion

COLLAPSE

I researched the case Kelo v City of New London. Because Kelo would not sell his property, the city condemned the property to force them to sell. The court further defined public use. To me, the court found a loop hole and went for it. I feel it was an unjust taking by the government in this case. For them to condemn the property to force them to sell was kind of a low blow to me.

Using eminent domain is allowable for the construction of border walls, but is the government using it fairly is the question. From the article I read, they are not. People will find a way to make the system work in their favor rather it is for good or bad.

No one in my family that I know of has experienced an eminent domain situation.

https://reason.com/2017/12/14/how-using-eminent-domain-to-seize-land-f/

https://www.thoughtco.com/eminent-domain-cases-4176337

Keith Waters

Week 4 Discussion

COLLAPSE

I would like to state as a libertarian I was very upset at the article I read in Forbes called “The Supreme Court Should End Pipeline Companies “Build First, Pay Later” Use of Eminent Domain”. The story talks about a couple that the pipeline was placed 400 feet from their front door, after they declined the first offer from the pipeline company and then they took them and several of their neighbors to Federal Court and the court gave the pipeline company possession of the land for the duration of the court struggle. The pipeline was built and the natural gas flows through the pipeline while the owners of the property are still in court seeking compensation. I do not believe that this is what the founder’s envisioned with eminent domain laws. I understand the reasons for the law for public works, by the government, but should private companies be able to use eminent while making a profit on the land that they have taken in the name of “public works”.

Now when it comes to the border wall, that is completely different case. The wall is being built as a defense against an entire number of social issues, such as illegal drugs, human trafficking, and illegal immigrants. The other difference is that the Federal Government is using its power of eminent domain to build the wall. I guess the thing I find interesting about the wall issue is that, if I owned a business in a town I would have to follow the guidelines set forth by the city for easements and spaces between my business and the adjacent business. I didn’t realize that the Federal Government had not set up a space between the boundaries of countries that borders the United States. Why is that I wonder?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/instituteforjustice/2

Part 2

Each week, you will be asked to respond to the prompt or prompts in the discussion forum. Your initial post should be 75-150 words in length, and is due on Sunday. By Tuesday, you should respond to two additional posts from your peers.

May It Please the Court …

For your initial post this week imagine that you are a lawyer arguing a case concerning federalism before the Supreme Court of the United States of America. This case has to do whether the power to create policy on a particular issue should be in the hands of the Federal Government, left to the States, or left in the hands of individual citizens.

Then, you must support your argument to the Supreme Court by finding and using an applicable part of the United States Constitution.

Select one of the following starters to start your argument (only do one):

  • May it please the court, the federal government, not the states has the power to legalize marijuana because …
  • May it please the court, the states, not the federal government, has the power to legalize marijuana because …
  • May it please the court, neither the states nor federal government has the power to legalize marijuana because …
  • May it please the court, the federal government, not the states, has the power to pass gun control because …
  • May it please the court, the states, not the federal government, has the power to pass gun control because …
  • May it please the court, neither the states nor federal government has the power to pass gun control because …
  • May it please the court, the federal government, not the states, has the power to pass education policy because …
  • May it please the court, the states, not the federal government, has the power to pass education policy because …
  • May it please the court, neither the states nor federal government has the power to pass education policy because …
  • May it please the court, the federal government, not the states, has the power to recognize or even restrict same sex marriages because …
  • May it please the court, the states, not the federal government, has the power to recognize or even restrict same sex marriages because …
  • May it please the court, neither the states nor federal government has the power to recognize or even restrict same sex marriages because …

For your two follow up posts you may do the following:

  • Pretend you are a justice of the Supreme Court and question the argument of one of your peers.
  • Respond to the questions of your peers to your initial argument.

View your discussion rubric.

Stephanie Jones

Week 4: Discussion

COLLAPSE

May it please the courts that neither the federal or state government have the power to pass gun control because it should be the decision on the individuals living in the United States to decide whether or not they should have the right to possess guns and how safe they feel with one’s ability to do so. To support this argument I turn to Amendment XIV (1868).

“No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens on the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law.”

Katie Sharky

Week 4 Discussion

COLLAPSE

May it please the court, the states, not the federal government, have the control to pass gun laws because they should be in control of regulating firearms. Depending on the state you live in, the states can have different laws and regulations when it comes to possessing a firearm. For instance, if you live in a state with a big city and high crime rates, it would be up to the state on the restrictions and process one would go through. For example, the state could enforce an age restriction, background check and mental evaluation before owning a firearm. They can also put restrictions on the type of guns one may possess and ban other guns all together. In other states with lower crime rates where hunting and farming are a way of life, their state gun laws could be made by them. For example, maybe some states only require an age restriction and a safety course before owning a firearm and they don’t put restrictions on the type of gun a person can own.

The constitution says, “A well regulated malitia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, should not be infringed”.


Assignment Pro (28431)
New York University
Is this question part of your assignment?

Sign up to get the full answer

Get Answer
   

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
$26
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Urgency
Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)
Have an assignment question? Get help from Expert tutors!
Your time is important. Let us write you an essay from scratch
100% plagiarism free
Sources and citations are provided
Stuck? We have tutors online 24/7 who can help
you get an A grade paper.
Ask Expert Tutors
Answer in as fast as 15 minites

Are you looking for Assignment Help save 20% with this code BIXBY