Question

Governmental Taking of Private Property

Certain religious organizations propose to build a private independent middle

school in a run-down neighborhood in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The religious

organizations asked the Redevelopment Authority of the City of Philadelphia to acquire

specific land for the project and sell it to them for a nominal price. The land included a

house on North Eighth Street owned by Mary Smith, whose daughter Veronica lived

there with her family. The Authority offered Smith $12,000 for the house and initiated a

taking of the property. Smith filed a suit in state court against the Authority, admitting

that the house was a “substandard structure in a blighted area,” but arguing that the

taking was unconstitutional because its beneficiary was private. The Authority asserted

that the taking would serve a public purpose---education.

On what basis can the

government take private property? What is the significance of Smith’s argument

(i.e., private beneficiary) and the Authority’s argument (i.e., it will serve a public

purpose)?

Answer 1

Introduction:-

For the economic development of a country, education serves as a broad tool which countries have used over the years, to deal with the specific problems of unemployment, low income and joblessness in the economy.

Most developing countries across the globe have spent huge amounts of money on educating their young generations and helping them in every way possible to gain knowledge which increases the productivity of the labor force within a country and helps it in achieving higher growth rates. Countries like India, China and others have rapidly been able to grow because of this basic achievement of education expenditure which causes the middle class to grow beyond their existing capacity and changes the skills of the workforce in the long run respectively.

Acquiring of Private Property:-

To be able to build more schools, colleges and other institutional bodies in a state so that the education levels can be maintained and increased, acquiring of property is widely required and undertaken by the central and state governments in the United States and beyond, so that the required infrastructure can be created. This has been debated and contested in various courts as in the current case of Smith vs the Government.

Case Specifics:-

On what basis can the government take private property?

Across all countries, acquisition laws are in place, which helps governments to acquire private property subject to compensation which are decided by state government and central government laws.

In the case above, the government has clearly stipulated that the use of this land would be for increasing the education levels within the state and thus can be used as a measure to acquire the private property in possession of Smith at the moment.

However, considering the case, Smith can indeed appeal in court because of the religious use it might be subject to and the fact that the government is choosing to sell it away at a lesser price to a private party who would then run the school. Such cases are independently considered by the court for review usually.

Question:-What is the significance of Smith’s argument (i.e., private beneficiary) and the Authority’s argument (i.e., it will serve a public purpose)?

In the case, Smiths argument is clear. The property is being resold to a different group who would thus serve as the true owner and would be running the educational institution in place of the government acquiring the peace of land. The government thus, would only in the case be serving as a middle man who would transfer the property to another private party which can be considered as unconstitutional and void.

The Authority on its part would argue in favor of increasing the education of the area and imparting knowledge to a large section of the society thus justifying the acquisition on its part respectively.

In this case, the court would look into the details of the case, but most likely would favor Smith because of the nature of the acquisition not being for end to end government interests but could potentially serve a religious purpose also in the long run since the use of the land would pass hands.

Please feel free to ask your doubts in the comments section if any.