Eminent domain is big threat

To the editor:

There is little I fear more than eminent domain. In a 1954, a unanimous Supreme Court in Berman v. Parker permitted eminent domain to assist urban renewal. It allowed property to be seized in an inner-city slum and sold to new owners for redevelopment. This power erupted into abuse by many developers and community leaders. Government can seize land by stretching the definition of public use.

Many communities have been using eminent domain to force people off their land so private developers can build expensive homes and office complexes, reasoning they will pay more in property taxes than the buildings they're replacing.

The St. Louis-Dispatch reported Jan. 31 ("Eminent domain takes aim at life's work") about an auto-repair business. In that article we learn that the Fifth Amendment allows local governments to take private property for public use as long as just compensation is provided. "In the two centuries since those terms were inked, it has been up to judges and lawmakers to decide what they mean."

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear the case of Kelo v. City of New London Feb. 22 and decide whether the Constitution allows the government to use eminent domain to take a person's home or small business so a bigger business can profit from the loss of their life's work.

Our courts and elected officials must protect us in these and other seizure-abuse situations if they expect our votes.

RANDY DUNN, Oak Ridge