Supporters of eminent domain often claim that the Constitution authorizes the government to seize private property for “public uses.” This, they argue, makes the use of eminent domain proper.
Lest we forget, slavery was once a part of the Constitution. But that did not make slavery proper or moral. It simply made slavery legal.
While the Constitution is the greatest political document ever written, it is not without its flaws. The purpose of the Constitution was to codify the principles of the American Revolution as stated in the Declaration of Independence: all men are endowed with certain unalienable rights, namely life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. In short, each individual has a moral right to live his life as he chooses, so long as he respects the rights of others to do the same. That the Founders were unable to fully implement this principle does not negate the principle.
Property rights are the practical implementation of individual rights. The right to property protects our freedom to create, attain, use, trade and dispose of the material values that sustain and enhance our lives.
The Constitution denied this freedom to slaves. The 18th Amendment (Prohibition) denied all Americans the freedom to manufacture, trade, or consume alcoholic beverages. Eminent domain continues to deny Americans the freedom to trade their property as they deem best.
To cite the Constitution as moral justification for eminent domain is to ignore the principles underlying that venerable document. Americans outlawed slavery and repealed Prohibition. Both were immoral and inconsistent with America’s founding principles. It is time that we recognize the fact that the same is true of eminent domain.