Eminent domain revisted

Eminent domain, also known as Initiative 31, has some scratching their heads on what it means, even after it passed with a landslide vote in the Nov. 8 election.  

Eminent domain issues have had a tumultuous history in the state. For example, in 2001, with the Canton Nissan plant, the state government tried to take the private land of Madison County resident Lorenzo Archie through the use of eminent domain and sell it to Nissan. Archie fought the state from taking his land and won.

In 2009, Gov. Haley Barbour vetoed HB 803, a bill that would have restricted the government from taking private land and selling it to businesses. Barbour would not back down on his stance against the initiative, believing it would hinder economic development in the state. 

Jonathan Winburn, assistant political science professor, said he thinks the initiative will not necessarily hamper economic development, but it may slow down the process of bringing in business. 

“The initiative was vague enough for there to be ways to work around it,” he said. “It may not be as simple or straightforward, but I think it may be a roadblock. I don’t think it will necessarily stop anybody.” 

The issue of government taking land to sell for private use under the pretense of economic development isn’t a new issue. In the 2005 Supreme Court case Kelo v. New London, it was ruled that the government could buy land to sell to private bidders, if it fit under the fair and public use clause of the Fifth Amendment. 

This allowed the government in the city of New London, Conn., to take the land of Susan Kelo and sell it to the developer who wanted to purchase it. This case would set a precedent for other states, like Mississippi, on how to handle the issue.    

On election night many Oxford residents voiced their opinions on Initiative 31. An overwhelming majority of residents voted in favor of the initiative. This can be reflected in the poll numbers — 683 Oxford residents voted yes while only 123 voted no. 

“I voted for it,” said Jennifer West, an Oxford resident for 36 years. “The main reason is that I think that capitalism should rule out; the government shouldn’t get involved.” 

Danny Dickey, a longtime Oxford resident, also voted yes on the issue. 

“I don’t like the idea of someone or the government taking my land,” he said. 

While many who voted in favor of the initiative understood that the government wouldn’t be able to take their land to sell for private use, they may not have known that the government can still take private land under eminent domain for public use, if it benefits the community. Some examples of exemptions found in the initiative include airports, bridges, roads and abandoned or condemned properties. 

“A lot of people just think that the government can’t take my land; this is what they are trying to stop,” Winburn said. 

“I think there are folks who understand it on some basic level, but I don’t think there is a lot of detailed understanding of what this initiative is trying to accomplish. The idea behind that — the way I understood it — was to prevent that. It doesn’t stop eminent domain; it just stops them from taking it and reselling it for private economic development.”