Theft is Theft

ByBrian Phillips

Imagine for a moment, that a neighbor’s young daughter desperately needs surgery to save her life, but her family can’t afford the medical expenses. If her father broke into homes in the neighborhood and stole money to pay for the surgery, we would recognize his actions as theft. His tragic circumstances do not change the fact that he deprived others of their values without the owner’s consent. To attempt to justify the father’s actions is to evade this fact.

Defenders of eminent domain engage in the same type of evasion. They attempt to justify the allegedly noble reasons for using eminent domain, and ignore the fact that property is being taken from its owner without his consent. Theft is theft, no matter the reason. And eminent domain is used to take property without the owner’s consent.

That the victim of eminent domain receives “just compensation” is irrelevant. (And “just compensation” isn’t really just.) The relevant issue is the owner’s consent or lack thereof. Under eminent domain, the owner does not voluntarily agree to sell his property. He is forced to sell, regardless of his own judgment and desires. His rational thought is rendered impotent.

The ends to not justify the means. Noble ends cannot be achieved through ignoble means. To defend eminent domain is to claim that theft is justified if the cause is allegedly noble enough.

Similar Posts

  • The Freedom to Trade and Use Vaccines

    ByBrian Phillips

    Last Friday, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) gave Americans permission to receive Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine. The FDA’s action came three weeks after the company submitted a request for Emergency Use Authorization. During those three weeks, nearly four million new COVID-19 cases were confirmed in the United States, and more than 40,000 Americans died from…

  • Friday Roundup 7-16-21

    ByBrian Phillips

    Writing in the Washington Times, George Mason University law professor Ilya Somin addresses the issue of “just compensation” required under the Fifth Amendment when eminent domain is used to seize property. Somin notes that courts typically equate “just compensation” with “fair market value.” However, many owners attach a value to their property far above what…

  • Deja Vu

    ByBrian Phillips

    In the last Texas legislative session, great controversy erupted over Austin’s attempts to reign in local governments. Bills were introduced to prohibit local controls over plastic bags, trees, short-term rentals, and more. Local governments claimed that these efforts by the state usurped their authority. A similar controversy has erupted in California. California State Senator Scott…

  • The Gridlock Economy

    ByBrian Phillips

    In The Gridlock Economy: How Too Much Ownership Wrecks Markets, Stops Innovation, and Costs Lives, Michael Heller argues that Private ownership usually creates wealth. But too much ownership has the opposite effect—it creates gridlock. Gridlock is a free market paradox. When too many people own pieces of one thing, cooperation breaks down, wealth disappears, and…

  • Who Owns an Idea?

    ByBrian Phillips

    For most property, ownership is a straightforward issue. We give the auto dealer money and in return we receive ownership of a vehicle. We give the grocer money and in return receive ownership of a basket of food. The exchange of values transfers ownership. Ownership in these instances is straightforward because we are dealing with…