• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Executive Order Issued Today

Mike

Well-known member
Executive Order: Protecting the Property Rights of the American People

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and to strengthen the rights of the American people against the taking of their private property, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Policy. It is the policy of the United States to protect the rights of Americans to their private property, including by limiting the taking of private property by the Federal Government to situations in which the taking is for public use, with just compensation, and for the purpose of benefiting the general public and not merely for the purpose of advancing the economic interest of private parties to be given ownership or use of the property taken.

Sec. 2. Implementation. (a) The Attorney General shall:

(i) issue instructions to the heads of departments and agencies to implement the policy set forth in section 1 of this order; and

(ii) monitor takings by departments and agencies for compliance with the policy set forth in section 1 of this order.

(b) Heads of departments and agencies shall, to the extent permitted by law:

(i) comply with instructions issued under subsection (a)(i); and

(ii) provide to the Attorney General such information as the Attorney General determines necessary to carry out subsection (a)(ii).

Sec. 3. Specific Exclusions. Nothing in this order shall be construed to prohibit a taking of private property by the Federal Government, that otherwise complies with applicable law, for the purpose of:

(a) public ownership or exclusive use of the property by the public, such as for a public medical facility, roadway, park, forest, governmental office building, or military reservation;

(b) projects designated for public, common carrier, public transportation, or public utility use, including those for which a fee is assessed, that serve the general public and are subject to regulation by a governmental entity;

c) conveying the property to a nongovernmental entity, such as a telecommunications or transportation common carrier, that makes the property available for use by the general public as of right;

(d) preventing or mitigating a harmful use of land that constitutes a threat to public health, safety, or the environment;

(e) acquiring abandoned property;

(f) quieting title to real property;

(g) acquiring ownership or use by a public utility;

(h) facilitating the disposal or exchange of Federal property; or

(i) meeting military, law enforcement, public safety, public transportation, or public health emergencies.

Sec. 4. General Provisions. (a) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(b) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) authority granted by law to a department or agency or the head thereof; or

(ii) functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budget, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(c) This order shall be implemented in a manner consistent with Executive Order 12630 of March 15, 1988.

(d) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity against the United States, its departments, agencies, entities, officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

GEORGE W. BUSH

THE WHITE HOUSE,

June 23, 2006.

# # #
 

Mike

Well-known member
Disagreeable said:
Got a link? Or is this wishful thinking on your part?

Yea, I got a link. Try the White House website.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/06/20060623-10.html
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Looks like that takes care of federal although there are always some future caveats. The spelling out of the fees could be a concern as eminent domain issues always carry some sort of compensation that is disputed.

Most of the taking was done not by the feds, but by other governmental agencies. In the New London Ct case I believe it was a city entity, in other cases it has been state entities that have done this. Most of these are done for developer's purposes which is usually not a federal issue but a more local government planning commission of some sort.

Does anyone remember the movie where they had the little flying saucers in the pigeon cages on the roof of a building and some old man who owned the building found it? Some developer wanted to take over a diner for expansion but in the end, the developer had to build the skyscraper around the old man's diner instead.
 

Latest posts

Top