There are some American cities that are directly on the border. The wall would have to be built on the American side for obvious reasons. I've come to the conclusion that to make room for the wall, you'd have to seize and demolish a fair amount of American homes and businesses.
The US government would have to buy out these properties. The ones refusing to be bought out would be forcibly seized by the government.
Federal eminent domain laws would have to be written and passed by congress and the senate , which they're usually against. Then the Supreme Court would have to vote on the issue of eminent domain.
It's become apparent to me that it's not as simple as just building a wall.
>>80503040
>It's become apparent to me that it's not as simple as just building a wall.
It's as simple as just building a wall.
>>80503040
you're right, they should just nuke mexico instead
Just build around them you dumb fuck
>>80503204
>>80503040
also nuke canada, never know when mexicans will try to sneak into the usa by going through canada
We've always been for eminent domain when it makes sense. This is the poster child example of a case where it makes sense.
>>80503040
eminent domain is used all of the time in America. What are you even saying?
>>80503040
>The wall would have to be built on the American side for obvious reasons.
We'll just have to annex some mexican clay and demolish some filthy mexican slums to move the border back a few miles.
>what is eminnate domain
>>80503040
>The wall would have to be built on the American side for obvious reasons
>There are some American cities that are directly on the border.
>Federal eminent domain laws would have to be written and passed by congress and the senate , which they're usually against.
a fucking leaf.
Soviets washed so many villages out to build Kiev water storages, its not impossible to do.
>>80503040
This might not be received well but I think in this case this is worth it. When eminant domain is used to seize private property so they can build a corporate office for tax reasons I think it is downright traitorous. However in this case it would be for the benefit of US citizens as a whole as greater border sovereignty is a net gain for all citizens.
For every cartel intrusion we should take at least a mile of Mexican territory. It's really that fucking simple.
>>80503778
I thought Republicans were generally heavily against eminent domain?
>Actually, I have determined that it isn't possible to ever build a wall anywhere!
>Guys, why are you laughing?
>>80504462
No, it has nothing to do with that. You can build a wall, but at the same time you have to practically steal private citizens land to build it.
>>80504278
I am mostly against it especially when peoples land is taken to drive up tax revenue but I recognize it has its uses here too. I imagine some asshole along the border wouldnt want the wall to go up through there, so instead of leaving a gap in it, we can seize some of their land, for a fair price, and do whats best for the people.
I dont speak for all right wingers I know I am in the minority here for once.
>>80504753
Most of the arguments against things like this include a slippery slope. It's really government sanctioned tyranny. You have no choice in whether or not you get to keep the land that you own.
>>80504712
You're talking to the nation that built the interstate highway system. You don't have a point.
>>80504931
I know its not an inherently good thing and there are numerous examples of it being abused at the expense of the person who's land has been taken, but I think overall is has a purpose to serve for things like this.
>>80503040
build the wall around them. They don't want to help the US be great again, wall them the fuck out.
>>80503040
Eminent domain, and obviously, the wall won't be a single continuous piece. That's obvious and been admitted by Trump several times before for these same reasons and others, including geography.
>>80504712
>>80504931
>It's tyranny, it's stealing!
>Get 5 times the property value of what you owned or more.
