Question

Eminent domain allows the government to gain control over property that was private. Do you think this should be allowed? Which philosophical approach do you think best supports it, and which best refutes it? How should we decide between them?

Answer 1

answer-

Eminent domain is the power of government to take private land for public use. This power is limited by the federal Constitution and by state constitutions .

The "Takings" Clause of the Fifth Amendment supports this in which  First, it applies only to private property. The second requirement under the Fifth Amendment is that the land be taken for public use. This limitation prevents government officials from taking private land for their own purposes.Finally, the Fifth Amendment requires just compensation. Fair compensation is typically determined using the market value of the land, that is, the price for which the landowner could reasonably expect to sell the land to some other buyer.

Inverse Condemnation Proceedings refutes this in which Sometimes, however, the government will deny that it has taken anything from the landowner. Thus, the landowner will commence an action, called an inverse condemnation proceeding, seeking compensation from the government. This situation can arise in a variety of ways. For example, the government might engage in conduct that destroys the landowner's ability to use and enjoy the property, such as by building an airstrip next to the property and flying planes over it, or cutting off or polluting the flow of water to the land. The government might also obstruct the landowner's access to the property with water or debris, as where dynamiting operations block the road to the landowner's property.

We should decide if the property is providing benefit to both land owner and the public. there should be no consideration for the interest of the government.If land owner is fairly compensated and there is no problem for land owner to sell their land then it should be decided to take their land for public use.