Eminent Domain and the Requisition of Property During Emergencies

Abstract

OLITICAL SCIENTISTS have long been concerned with the problem of adjusting liberty and authority. Many are agreed that the operation of a democratic system of government can be well understood only when continually viewed in this context. Students of government recognize that the task of maintaining a balance between governmental power and the citizens' freedom is never really completed, since new conditions constantly create the need for striking a new balance. The most that we can hope for is the maintenance of some semblance of an equilibrium which meets the needs of a given time. In recent years it has been difficult indeed to balance the claims of individual rights and governmental necessity, largely because of the serious economic depression and the emergency conditions created by World War II and the fighting in Korea. Economic and military mobilization which has been justified in terms of preservation of the nation clashes at many points with the interests of individuals and of groups. Concern over this fundamental matter is evidenced by the tremendous volume of literature now appearing on such subjects as espionage, loyalty programs, communism, the extent of economic controls, the size of the military establishment, and academic freedom. It is well known that during periods of peace as well as of emergency it may be necessary for the government to take private property for public use or to restrict the individual's freedom to deal with his property. In such situations the clash between the individual and his government is dramatically defined in bold relief. However, with the exception of references to this subject in discussions of the Steel Seizure Case, very little attention has been directed by either political scientists or legal scholars toward the evaluation of current developments in eminent domain and the requisition of property during emergencies. And although the Steel Seizure Case continues to be one of the most widely discussed cases in recent years, the comments are directed principally toward the scope of the President's constitutional powers rather than toward the subject of eminent domain. It is the purpose of this essay to examine the topic of eminent domain, with special reference to the more recent developments. Some material relating to the origin and evolution of the power of eminent domain has been included, since it is felt that greater insight into the present-day practical and theoretical problems will be thus afforded.