If your land is involved, you can take the Government entity who needs it (and the E.D. process requires that they demonstrate need or they cannot use it to take property) to Court to potentially increase your compensation, but you cannot stop them from acquiring it unless you can show that they don’t need it to build their project.
First off, it’s not stealing, fair compensation is made, but no, most likely I would not like it … particularly if it was a partial take that significantly deteriorated the quality of what remained. But that’s tough … I don’t have to like it … it’s for the greater good. That’s the whole idea of it. And has been pointed out, the Interstate Highway System, most intra-state highways, and virtually every major airport in the country would not exist without it. So in brief, yes, you would have to deal with it if it happens to you. It’s the law of the land and it has been tested Constitutionally. There is no legal recourse.
And cons talk about libs and government overreach. 
.
Replace the wall with healthcare and you are basically a lib
1 Like
I have seen many property owners gain substantially by negotiating over compensation for property, often times several times more than they could have gotten on the open market. Most people don’t seem to realize that they can negotiate … some of them get screwed, particularly when the taking doesn’t cover the whole property. There is nothing like having your 20 foot green strip removed and replaced with a busy highway 20 feet from your house. However, that is very unlikely in the instance of the border wall. Most of the properties involved are expansive ranches and the partial take would be a small percentage of the total. At worst, the rancher would be inconvenienced if he has to transit the barrier frequently to use his land on the river side.
Tha authorization in this instance comes from the Supreme Court.
Complaining about overreach wont change the fact that Eminent Domain is the law of the land and that it has survived several Supreme Court appeals. Your only options at this point are to convince a majority of the House, a super majority of the Senate, and the President to change the law, or to take up arms and lead a successful revolt against the Government. I wouldn’t put money on you doing either of those things.
And pissing and moaning about the border barrier (and comparing it to healthcare) won’t do any good either. It’s happening whether you like it or not.
How much land do I have and how much of it do I get to keep? And am I being paid off by Mexican cartels to let them funnel drugs and sex-slaves through my property?
Well done Chris.
Right on Sister! 
Let’s bake some wedding cakes together sometime.
“Fair” as determined by whom?
Numerous scientific analysis, most experts, and logic.
The vast majority of illicit drugs come in through legal ports of entry.
The vast majority of illegal aliens are people who overstay their visas. Additionally, most illegals come through legal ports of entry as well.
If you are capable of cogent thought, you would come to the same conclusion.
1 Like
who are the “experts”?
Here is just one analysis. My impression is that you know more than those educated in this area and experienced in the field. You should produce your professional study/analysis/data.
How many of your “experts” have ever actually breached a wall or crossed a border surreptitiously?
1 Like
They would need to why? I can give accurate, factual analysis of professional football but I could never play it.
And there we have it.
If I owned a ranch on the border I would donate enough land for the wall free of charge.
2 Likes
By both parties and settled by court arbitration if they cannot agree.
Usually the government gives compensation, aND certain conditions must be met before the land is condemned. That said, if I were in this situation, I would probably begrudgingly give my property.
The other alternative is for the government to force the land owners to pay for the segment of the govmernment infrastructure that is on their land…not the best solution, at all.
We need the wall though. It may save the U.S. some money in the long run, lowering illegal border crossings from Mexico. I would hope that it would not restrict emigration as much as it restricts immigration.
1 Like
Quoted for hilarious posterity.
