Legalized theft

Eminent domain exists to allow governments to purchase private property at fair market value in order to serve a public good. That used to be defined in relation to some government function: building a military base, highway, or some other essential public facility.

But the Supreme Court has turned it into a Sword of Damocles, hanging over any private property owner that dares stand their ground against the politically well-connected:

Would you let the government take your car and give it to someone else? How about your computer, television set, house, or business? What if the government said you would be paid yet you had no choice?

That's the dilemma in Auburn, New York, where the city is threatening to invoke eminent domain to seize private property for a private project -a hotel conference center, saying the public good outweighs the private property rights of some citizens. And it's legal.

As we are so often reminded by political tangent, it was once legal to own slaves, but that didn't make it right. How can any private property owner feel personally secure when the government reserves the right to put their considerable thumb on the scale of any negotiation with some would-be Donald Trump? Legalized 'slavery' can take many forms. As this story shows, we are far from the nation we pretend to be:

The prospect of the government forcing the sale of someone's land against their will has touched a nerve here. There have been protests and calls against the plan. But two property owners reportedly have reached an agreement, including a Chinese restaurant whose owners emigrated from Communist China and said in public hearings that they never knew there was a law on the books in America that permitted the state to seize their land for private, commercial purposes.

It's fast becoming a tossup exactly which abuse of authority will provide the spark for what is a very dry tinderbox.