Sarah Hall Hall 1

Mrs. Dorothea Williams-Arnold

1040 AP/IB

6/07/2019

Although some may argue eminent domain justly compensates the owner, i believe the

court is constructed in a way that disregards the owners opinion and voice. Those who argue it

fairly compensate the owners because they are paid the property value. But for those minorities

who live in properties with very low market values are left poor and now homeless. The

following evidence will display how eminent domain is not productive or beneficial, hence why I

disagree with it.

Many believe market value is a fair way to summarize the worth of one’s property, i

believe it forgets minorities on purpose to get good deals. As stated in source B many companies

use eminent domain to obtain property. Though they rarely often hold their end of the deal which

is to bring money into the community like General Dynamincs many companies buy large sums

of land in acres with the low market value and swell the land to a bigger company when the

value has risen. Thus, they make easy money and leave a couple of families homeless. This is

important because anyone with private property within a city looking to rebuild itself, is in

danger of having it get snatched away for a few pennies.

So believe the court system justly decides who shall prevail, I believe the court system is

tricked into favoring companies because they have so much political and financial power. Most

people who believe this have never faced eminent domain or lived in high market areas which

displace citizens from aging insight in the seriousness of how dangerous eminent domain is. As

written in Source C, of eminent domain appropriates itself in minority areas. These areas are
know to be poor and are not able to protect themselves against companies with good lawyers.

The source also states the people are left in even worse living situations than before.

This is important because it affects hundreds of people. And it is caused by companies

looking to find a cheap way to operate at the expense of the poor. If this keeps occurring we will

see more and more examples of the rich besting the poor. Which in turn will cause riots,

understandingly so.

Some believe land owners are favored by the court, it is shown constantly that they are

forced to agree on the top sided deals. As shown in source F, many land owners disagree with the

deals they are offered. This because many are offered less than half of what their property is

valued. Obviously, they do not accept but they have to spend money in order to go to court and

defend their property. Either way, there is no end to the ordeal until the disputes has let the

opposition win. This means that some companies will go as far as to split property in half in

order to receive what they want. Once again leaving the owner at its expense. This is important

because public insist be aware of the injustice happening in America. We should care because

one day it could be us in court fighting for our possessions.

In conclusion, I believe eminent domain is not fair, beneficial or productive. This is

because there are tons of occurrences where companies exploit the court system in order to save

money and leave the poor homeless.