One controversial topic regarding real estate is eminent domain. According the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution, “private property [shall not] being taken for public use, without just compensation.” This essentially means that property owners are protected from wrongful treatment from the government, but it also gives the government the power to acquire private property. This is only the case when three requirements are satisfied. First, the seizing of private property must be for the greater good of the public. Some examples may include building or expanding a major roadway and building new schools. Second, the property owner must paid “just compensation” in exchange. And third, the state cannot take property from a person without due process of law ("US Legal, Inc", 2016). There are a few issues when it comes to the legality of eminent domain. The main one is that the state – the government- does not pay nearly enough to the property owners. Additionally, an argument arises when a private developer versus public does the seizing. …show more content…
How can a property owner have to sell their property to the state at a “just compensation?” Under eminent domain, just compensation is the fair market value of a parcel that must be paid to a landowner who had their property taken by the government ("National Paralegal College", 2016). However, this is the caveat of eminent domain: the system does not uphold the economic concept of subjective value. Fair value does not include the priceless moments of where you got engaged, or a child’s first steps, or bricks your great-grandfather laid down himself. Subject value is just that: the theory that “nothing has an inherent or universally agreed upon value” (Millsap, 2015). An one hundred year home could mean nothing to you, but priceless to