Eminent Domain And Regulation Of Private Property At All Government Levels Of The United States And The Property Rights Movement In The Late Twentieth Century

The private property right is one of the fundamental rights of American citizens,but in the twentieth century,private property rights and governmental power became increasingly unbalanced in the game.In order to meet the needs of social and economic development,the U.S.government at all levels interfered with private property by exercising eminent domain and police powers in accordance with a series of laws and regulations.Physical takings were common in the Urban Renewal schemes that emerged in the 1950 s and 1960 s,while regulatory takings was common in federal environmental legislation,state growth management legislation and local government zoning plans.Against this background,those owners of the properties in question have filed lawsuits to seek judicial relief.There is thus a fierce competition between the private owners and the public authorities at the judicial level.As the final judicial body,the Federal Supreme Court’s numerous judicial decisions have had a significant impact on private property rights.For example,Pennsylvania Coal Co.v.Mahon in 1922.Some of the more common doctrines and principles have emerged from the Federal Supreme Court’s rules of these cases.In physical takings case,the Federal Supreme Court has introduced the doctrine of “public purpose”,thereby expanding the governments’ power of eminent domain.In regulatory takings cases,the courts have evolved the principles of “substantial relation” and “economically viable use”.These doctrines and principles do not,however,represent a fixed pattern for the courts to follow.The U.S.courts have also advanced other doctrines,such as doctrines of excess burden,time,reciprocity of interest and balance of interests,which have also often used in the trials.In any event,only a minority of property owners’ claims could be upheld by the courts,which tended to show a certain degree of judicial restraint.For the other words,American Governments preferred to show respect for the governments’ power of eminent domain and police power.As a result,the 1980 s and 1990 s saw a nationwide movement for property rights.But the property rights movement did not emerge out of nowhere.It was preceded by the Sagebrush Rebellion in the western states in the late 1970 s and the Wise-Use Movement in the late 1980 s,which provided a good foundation for the property rights movement.Within the property rights movement,non-profit property rights organizations have been active,while many folk artists have created songs and films to express their nostalgia for traditional notions of property rights.At the same time,the property rights movement has made some legislative breakthroughs.Although Congress did not pass legislation to protect private property rights,a number of states did.Finally,the property rights movement has also had some gradual success in the judicial sphere.Through a series of influential property rights cases,new principles and doctrines have been developed by courts at all levels in the United States to support private property rights.By the end of the 1990 s,the property rights movement was on the wane.In the case of Kelo v.City of New London in 2005,the Federal Supreme Court upheld a local government’s action to transfer expropriated private property to a private company for “economic development”.The case sparked strong opposition and criticism from the general public,the media,civil organizations,and even government officials,and the property rights movement was revived.At the same time,there was also a significant legislative and judicial response,with the Congress introducing bills to protect private property rights,state legislatures introducing legislation to protect private property rights,and the Federal Supreme Court reasserting respect for private property rights in a number of environmental cases.