Eminent domain

Eminent domain—also called land acquisition, compulsory purchase, resumption, compulsory acquisition, or expropriation—is the forced taking of private property for public use. This power does not allow the government to take property from one private owner and give it to another unless there is a valid public purpose and just compensation is paid. The state can delegate this authority to local governments, other government bodies, or even private individuals and companies, as long as they are carrying out a public function.

Property taken through eminent domain is most often used for roads, government buildings, and public utilities. Railroads, for example, were frequently granted this power to acquire land or easements for building rail networks. In the mid-20th century, a new use emerged: the government could take property and transfer it to a private developer for redevelopment. Initially, this was limited to properties labeled "blighted" or a "development impediment," on the grounds that such land harmed neighboring owners. Later, it was expanded to allow taking any private property if the new owner’s development would generate higher tax revenues.

Some jurisdictions require the taker to first try to buy the property before using eminent domain. Once the taking is final, the condemnor owns the property in fee simple and can use it for purposes other than those originally specified. Takings can be total or partial, either in terms of physical area or legal interest—such as an easement or any right less than full ownership.

The term "eminent domain" comes from the 1625 legal treatise *De jure belli ac pacis* by Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius, who used the Latin phrase *dominium eminens* (supreme ownership). He wrote that the property of subjects is under the state’s eminent domain, so the state may use, alienate, or even destroy it—not only in extreme necessity (where even private persons have such rights) but also for public utility, to which private ends must give way. However, the state must compensate those who lose their property.

Eminent domain is not limited to real estate. Condemnors can also take personal property, including intangible assets like contract rights, patents, trade secrets, and copyrights. The California Supreme Court even held that taking a professional sports team’s franchise could qualify as a "public use," though the specific taking of the Oakland Raiders’ NFL franchise was later blocked for violating the Interstate Commerce Clause.

A taking must be accompanied by "just compensation," meant to put the owner in the same financial position as if the property had not been taken. In practice, U.S. courts usually limit compensation to the property’s fair market value based on its highest and best use. But this is not the only measure; for instance, *Kimball Laundry Co. v. United States* allowed compensation for business losses in temporary takings, and *United States v. Pewee Coal Co.* covered operating losses from government seizure during World War II. Most incidental losses—such as attorneys’ fees, appraisers’ fees, or other demonstrable costs—are not compensated by U.S. courts. However, some states have legislated compensation for certain losses like business goodwill, and the federal Uniform Relocation Assistance Act provides partial coverage.

In Africa, Zimbabwe’s government under Robert Mugabe compulsorily purchased large amounts of land and homes, mainly from white farmers, as part of land reform. The government argued this was necessary to redistribute land to those dispossessed during colonialism. Compensation was delayed, but in 2022 the government agreed to pay US$3.5 billion to farmers who lost land.

In Asia, China’s constitution permits "requisitions"—its form of eminent domain—when necessary for the public interest and with compensation. The 2019 Amendment of the Land Administration Law provides detailed guidelines to guarantee greater financial security for farmers and displaced people.

India’s Constitution originally included the Fundamental Right to property under Articles 19 and 31. Article 19 guaranteed the right to acquire, hold, and dispose of property. Article 31 stated that no one could be deprived of property except by law, and that compensation would be paid.