Texas Landowners First to Challenge Trump's National Emergency Plan

[Emjay]

@Once-Ler

Your private property is not your private property.  Trump owns your private property.  He knows imminent domain likely better than anyone in the USA.  In the past, he has said he "loves" imminent domain because he uses it to get land on which to build.  In his mind, all land is his.

Yesterday, I heard a Texas woman land owner speak, whose house, when they take her land, will be FIVE feet from the wall.  The government has already been to see her to tell her they are taking the land. She has never seen an illegal in her area; never seen anyone come out of the water where her house is.  Her father and another family member are law enforcement officers so, to me, that makes her credible in what she says - she is not a nut case.  She said if she saw any illegal coming out of the river or around her house, she could call them and she has never had to do that.

I would think she is going to have to move, give up all her land as no one would want that property now, 5 feet from the wall.  Another Trump "win".

No @Victoria33   It is not another Trump win; it is a win for America.  I would think you'd been around long enough to realize that.

That woman will be well compensated and she is not a victim.  My co-worker in Irving had her house taken for expansion of the DFW Airport.  She and all the other residents so affected were very well compensated and most of them were thrilled. 

[Emjay]

I just heard on Fox radio that Sen. Cruz suggested/advised to use money taken from El Capo.

That leads me to think he supports building the barriers. It further suggests using money to buy land.

Of course absent specifics, I admit to guessing some.

I hope he isn't sitting on the fence.


Has anybody seen his "official" position?

Ted Cruz is absolutely not on the fence.  He has been an extremely vocal advocate for grabbing that El Chapo money and using it for the fence.  That would be totally poetic justice and Mexico would pay for the fence after all ... in a way.

[EdJames]

Land has been taken before for roads, airports and various vital infrastructure.  This current takeover  is a cause that is far more important to the national interest and it is popular with the majority of Americans.

This is not something new and strange.  I worked in an office that was on land which was taken over by the expansion of DFW Airport.  Numerous homeowners lost their land and homes but were well-compensated for it.

What is it with people who seem determined to create imaginary roadblocks to thwart Trump's plan?

That is what makes so many of the threads absolutely comical!

Maybe it is me, but I find it bizarre that people will argue all day and night about topics/issues that they have absolutely no chance of impacting or changing.  And, with the passage of time, we all get to see how things actually play out.

I see this as a perfect analogy.

One month from now there will be a game played between Team A and Team B.  No one here is a member of Team A nor Team B.  Yet, there will be many threads going on for pages and pages arguing about which team will win the game, and how they will do it.  Rather than just wait a month and see the result.

[Emjay]

Say what?

Disrespect for property rights by the crown was probably the uniting factor in the American Revolution. Don't think that sentiment has changed much today..

Sentiment has nothing to do with it.  From the time the railroad moved west, the government has lawfully taken private property for national needs but not without compensation.

[roamer_1]

Just addressing the "water the cattle issue".  This is frequently brought up as an issue.  As someone who is more than passingly aware of both cows and this environment, you don't want your cows to have to walk a long way to get water, because they can't put on weight as quickly.  Not much grazing land is right next to the river, and the river is polluted and almost dry much of the year.  Cows are more frequently watered from tanks, filled by windmills or electric pumps.

@Sanguine
I will take your word for it - But I have seen that very same thing happen up here over a freeway right of way.

The old woman they did it to finally prevailed, and forced them to buy the entire piece of her place that she could no longer access (at a premium rate because that land was capable of becoming residential lots until the highway went through... So they paid her undeveloped residential price).

I was part of the crew that the state and fed paid to take her entire homestead apart and put it back together precisely as it was (to the inch) on the back end of her place where there was a rural access road.

Quite a woman.

[Sanguine]

@Sanguine
I will take your word for it - But I have seen that very same thing happen up here over a freeway right of way.

The old woman they did it to finally prevailed, and forced them to buy the entire piece of her place that she could no longer access (at a premium rate because that land was capable of becoming residential lots until the highway went through... So they paid her undeveloped residential price).

I was part of the crew that the state and fed paid to take her entire homestead apart and put it back together precisely as it was (to the inch) on the back end of her place where there was a rural access road.

Quite a woman.

Sounds like she was.   

[sneakypete]

I have been in on these deals before @sneakypete , and she may well have a legitimate bitch.

So the fed comes in and takes a corridor through your property, and splits your property down the middle... Now the half beyond the barrier is useless to you. And that's the half with the water on it.

And to make matters worse, the Fed wants to save money, so the portion they take by eminent domain, is all range, at an undeveloped range price. Now your place just got cut in half, you can't water your cattle, and there's a barrier in your back yard fifty feet off your porch.

You say sell and get out, well who is going to buy into that? And how do you get enough out of the proceeds to satisfy the bank?

@roamer_1

I don't have all the answers,but I do have the most important one. Those land owners have known this could happen before they even bought the land,and should have allowed for it. If it is a matter of water,they should be allowed t drill wells,or have access to the water for their animals via a gate or gates. If all else fails,the "tough titty rule" applies. Suck it up and move on. NO one individual or even group of individuals are more valuable than the whole of the country,and this is a national defense issue.

[Emjay]

Sounds like she was.   

Most people are not that stubborn, thankfully.

But why are people suddenly, and I mean suddenly, so concerned about the endless number of people whose property has been taken over the years for various vital national projects?

It's not a sudden concern for homeowners' rights.  It is simply a desire to stop Trump from doing something that will benefit America.

Nancy Pelosi would be proud.

[roamer_1]

@roamer_1

I don't have all the answers,but I do have the most important one. Those land owners have known this could happen before they even bought the land,and should have allowed for it. If it is a matter of water,they should be allowed t drill wells,or have access to the water for their animals via a gate or gates. If all else fails,the "tough titty rule" applies. Suck it up and move on. NO one individual or even group of individuals are more valuable than the whole of the country,and this is a national defense issue.

@sneakypete
I don't see it like that - If it ain't political gymnastics (which it may in fact, probably be), those that haven't settled ahead of time are gonna file the minute the thing becomes real. That is their leverage to get out (or live with) the best conditions they can get.

I am sure they have had front guys down there for a while now trying to pave the way... Eminent domain is the hard, hard way... They are likely buying the right of way they need.

The 'tough titty' way is not fast. Eminent domain can be locked up in court for years. That ol gal I mentioned up thread held out and would not budge, and held up that freeway for nearly five years all by herself

[edpc]

Most people are not that stubborn, thankfully.

But why are people suddenly, and I mean suddenly, so concerned about the endless number of people whose property has been taken over the years for various vital national projects?

It's not a sudden concern for homeowners' rights.  It is simply a desire to stop Trump from doing something that will benefit America.

Nancy Pelosi would be proud.

Hardly sudden. It’s been an issue for years and was really brought to the fore, when Kelo was argued before SCOTUS. It was the premiere example of why Souter was a terrible appointment. You may recall how the suit against Trump was brought up over his attempt to take a NJ woman’s home for his casino parking lot, during the 2016 campaign. It’s not new and your ignorance is no excuse to invoke Pelosi and NT-ism.

[roamer_1]

Hardly sudden. It’s been an issue for years and was really brought to the fore...

Don't forget the Bundy ranch. I dang near went down there for that one.

[Mesaclone]

Let's make this argument simple.

If you are categorically opposed to eminent domain, you are opposed to building a border wall. That is your right, but rather than arguing the minutia of Eminent Domain rights, why not simply come out and say you are...with the Dems...against building the wall?

You can't have it both ways...your with the President and for the wall and thus MUCH better border security...or you are with the Dems (ostensibly out of a dislike for Eminent Domain usage) and are willing to accept weak border security.
 
And let's keep in mind, the idea was never to have a solid "Great Wall of China" structure, but wall/barrier where it is most needed to funnel/deflect immigration to areas the Border Patrol can more strictly regulate. Most of the land in Arizona is public...including the majority around the Yuma corridor which is going to get new wall structures. In Texas, if you want a wall, you have to favor Eminent Domain as it is the ONLY way the wall can be built effectively.

[roamer_1]

Let's make this argument simple.

If you are categorically opposed to eminent domain, you are opposed to building a border wall. That is your right, but rather than arguing the minutia of Eminent Domain rights, why not simply come out and say you are...with the Dems...against building the wall?

You can't have it both ways...your with the President and for the wall and thus MUCH better border security...or you are with the Dems (ostensibly out of a dislike for Eminent Domain usage) and are willing to accept weak border security.
 
And let's keep in mind, the idea was never to have a solid "Great Wall of China" structure, but wall/barrier where it is most needed to funnel/deflect immigration to areas the Border Patrol can more strictly regulate. Most of the land in Arizona is public...including the majority around the Yuma corridor which is going to get new wall structures. In Texas, if you want a wall, you have to favor Eminent Domain as it is the ONLY way the wall can be built effectively.

I doubt anyone here categorically opposes eminent domain.
And yeah - You CAN have it both ways.
I am ultimately alright with eminent domain, but not at the expense of allowing the fed to steamroll the property owners they are effecting.

[Emjay]

Let's make this argument simple.

If you are categorically opposed to eminent domain, you are opposed to building a border wall. That is your right, but rather than arguing the minutia of Eminent Domain rights, why not simply come out and say you are...with the Dems...against building the wall?

You can't have it both ways...your with the President and for the wall and thus MUCH better border security...or you are with the Dems (ostensibly out of a dislike for Eminent Domain usage) and are willing to accept weak border security.
 
And let's keep in mind, the idea was never to have a solid "Great Wall of China" structure, but wall/barrier where it is most needed to funnel/deflect immigration to areas the Border Patrol can more strictly regulate. Most of the land in Arizona is public...including the majority around the Yuma corridor which is going to get new wall structures. In Texas, if you want a wall, you have to favor Eminent Domain as it is the ONLY way the wall can be built effectively.

It is beyond my comprehension @Mesaclone that some of our members would clutch their hatred of Trump so close to their bosoms that it trumps all feeling for our country and, essentially, plays into the hands of a very corrupt and evil democrat party.

[Mesaclone]

I doubt anyone here categorically opposes eminent domain.
And yeah - You CAN have it both ways.
I am ultimately alright with eminent domain, but not at the expense of allowing the fed to steamroll the property owners they are effecting.

Steamroll....that's just making stuff up. Nobody is getting steamrolled nor is their any suggestion that they WILL be.

Landowners will go through the Eminent Domain process and receive fair market compensation for the property used for the Wall...no differently than if a freeway was passing through.

So no, you CAN'T have it both ways...at least...not without being a blatant hypocrite.

This is a desperately needed national security structure, there is a long history of the use of Eminent Domain for such a purpose...and zero reason to think anyone is being "steamrolled"...more likely they will receive excessive compensation.

Many here are using Eminent Domain to argue against building the Wall...an argument that is nonsensical unless you oppose Eminent Domain in all cases. What could possibly be a stronger argument for using Eminent Domain then an issue threatening the physical security of the nation?

[Mesaclone]

It is beyond my comprehension @Mesaclone that some of our members would clutch their hatred of Trump so close to their bosoms that it trumps all feeling for our country and, essentially, plays into the hands of a very corrupt and evil democrat party.

The term the Socialists would use is "useful idiots".

[roamer_1]

Steamroll....that's just making stuff up. Nobody is getting steamrolled nor is their any suggestion that they WILL be.

Landowners will go through the Eminent Domain process and receive fair market compensation for the property used for the Wall...no differently than if a freeway was passing through.

So no, you CAN'T have it both ways...at least...not without being a blatant hypocrite.

Yes, I very much can. Fair market value is a subjective term. And like I showed upthread, people can be destroyed by this process, and I have been witness to such an attempt. More than once.

And I don't know if they're getting steamrolled - The Bundy Ranch and the Red River deal show what can happen. If you were under the illusion that the property can just be taken and just get building, you are under a delusion.

This is a desperately needed national security structure, there is a long history of the use of Eminent Domain for such a purpose...and zero reason to think anyone is being "steamrolled"...more likely they will receive excessive compensation.

And that long history shows it to be a long process, full of court dates.

Many here are using Eminent Domain to argue against building the Wall...an argument that is nonsensical unless you oppose Eminent Domain in all cases. What could possibly be a stronger argument for using Eminent Domain then an issue threatening the physical security of the nation?

No, Many here are not ok with carta blanche trust that the Fed is going to do right by them folks, and many of us know that this process, if allocated to eminent domain, will be in court longer than Tumpy can be president.

[Emjay]

The term the Socialists would use is "useful idiots".

Yeah, but useful to whom?

To the democrats, that's for sure.  But what is in the self-interest of any Republican?

They cannot continue to claim that they are only interested in the vested rights of homeowners since it has been proven that those rights have been subject to takeover for many years and for many reasons.

There is no justification beyond Trump hate.  None.

[edpc]

What could possibly be a stronger argument for using Eminent Domain then an issue threatening the physical security of the nation?

The entire premise of this ‘emergency’ is BS and this is a fan dance for the base. Trump even said so by incredibly uttering, “I didn’t need to do this, I just wanted to build the wall faster.”

If it was a true emergency, concerning physical security of the nation, why not declare martial law, under his authority as CiC, as Gohmert suggested last fall? After all, stopping the illegals and traffickers at places away from ports of entry is paramount, is it not? There’s your having it both ways and blatant hypocrisy.

Gohmert said there’s no way that California can become a gateway for the invading horde of migrants.

“This is really dangerous,” he said. ‘There is no way everybody in that caravan is loving, caring people. You’ve got some people coming in to do damage to the United States.”

https://www.toddstarnes.com/show/gohmert-trump-could-declare-martial-law-along-border/

[roamer_1]

this is a fan dance for the base.

Good Lord, but I didn't need that picture in my head.... 

[Emjay]

The entire premise of this ‘emergency’ is BS and this is a fan dance for the base. Trump even said so by incredibly uttering, “I didn’t need to do this, I just wanted to build the wall faster.”

If it was a true emergency, concerning physical security of the nation, why not declare martial law, under his authority as CiC, as Gohmert suggested last fall? After all, stopping the illegals and traffickers at places away from ports of entry is paramount, is it not?

Gohmert said there’s no way that California can become a gateway for the invading horde of migrants.

“This is really dangerous,” he said. ‘There is no way everybody in that caravan is loving, caring people. You’ve got some people coming in to do damage to the United States.”

https://www.toddstarnes.com/show/gohmert-trump-could-declare-martial-law-along-border/

Lame effort, Ed.  Why don't you just stand by your so-called convictions and admit you would be against any method that Trump chose to protect our southern border.

[edpc]

Lame effort, Ed.  Why don't you just stand by your so-called convictions and admit you would be against any method that Trump chose to protect our southern border.

Why don’t you ever have at least some modicum of understanding or historical perspective on an issue, before you amble into a thread with your mouth-breather opinions?

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Declaring a national emergency to fund Trump's border wall may be what finally kills the project

Texas landowners would have few legal options if Congress funded the wall. But if Trump goes around them, lawyers will have a field day.

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/declaring-national-emergency-fund-trump-s-border-wall-may-be-ncna966586
More at link above.

Thanx for that link.

[sneakypete]

It is beyond my comprehension @Mesaclone that some of our members would clutch their hatred of Trump so close to their bosoms that it trumps all feeling for our country and, essentially, plays into the hands of a very corrupt and evil democrat party.

@Emjay

It's emotional for them. They spent years worshiping whatever Party Person spat out by the RNC,and suddenly this rich,arrogant,NYC elitist who has been friends with and making under the table deals with Dims his entire life BECAUSE HE GREW UP IN NYC,swoops in and pulls the ground right out from under JEB,Ted,and all the other usual suspects. It's like expecting a monk to accept that suddenly there is no God.

It's just too much for them to handle,so they freak out and join with the Dims in the hope of destroying the enemy of both so things can go back to "normal" and none of that "independent thinking stuff" is required.

The instant that Trump is out of office they  will happily go back to supporting JEB,Mittens,or any other candidate that the RNC pushes in front of them. They will be back in a world they understand,and everything will be just peachy-keen again.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Most people are not that stubborn, thankfully.