The government practice of eminent domain, the\u00a0forceful seizure of land by the government under the auspices of “highest and best use”, has been\u00a0\u00a0the bane of many Libertarians and property rights activists over the last few decades. \u00a0Recently in Utah, however, we are seeing a newly emerging front in the debate.<\/p>\n
Utah Governor Gary Herbert (R) has suggested recently that the state of Utah could seize Federally-owned land under the justification of eminent domain<\/a>. \u00a0To most legal scholars, this seems to be a possible violation of McCulloch v. Maryland. <\/em>What do you think? \u00a0Should a state’s right to apply eminent domain trump the federal government’s right? \u00a0Or vice versa? \u00a0Or should the whole practice of eminent domain go the way of the dinosaurs?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The government practice of eminent domain, the\u00a0forceful seizure of land by the government under the auspices of “highest and best use”, has been\u00a0\u00a0the bane of many Libertarians and property rights activists over the last few decades. \u00a0Recently in Utah, however, … Continue reading