In 2015, Hennepin County, Minnesota, seized a condominium for $15,000 in unpaid property taxes. A year later, the condominium was sold for $40,000. The county kept all of the money in an act that many call home equity theft.
The condo owner sued and the US Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit ruled for the government, stating, “Whether a property interest exists ‘is determined by reference to existing rules or understandings that stem from an independent source such as state law.’” Phillips v. Washington Legal Foundation, 524 U.S. 156, 164 (1978). In other words, according to the court, property rights are a creation of the State. And what the State giveth, the State can taketh away.
If property rights are a creation of the State, then they are nothing more than temporary permissions that may be removed whenever the State deems it appropriate. Individuals cannot act on the basis of their own judgment, but only as government officials permit.
In regard to property, this means that government owns everything, including our home, our automobile, and our money. We are allowed to use these values to the extent that government allows. At any time, that permission can be revoked. We are mere stewards for the government.
Home equity theft is only one example of this premise in action. Eminent domain is another. Eminent domain allows government to seize private property for purposes it deems in the “public interest.” Indeed, a litany of property rights violations are defended on the grounds that they serve the “common good.”
While fighting property rights violations in the courts is certainly necessary, that isn’t where the war will be won. The fundamental conflict is philosophical. The conflict is between the belief that individuals should be free to pursue their own happiness and the belief that individuals exist to serve the State. The founding of the United States was a consequence of the former. Home equity theft, eminent domain, and a host of similar policies are a consequence of the latter.