Gary Johnson Views Eminent Domain as Supreme Court Litmus Test

Johnson Sees Kelo Supporters as Non-Starters for Court

by Brett Linley

When it comes to what a Gary Johnson-appointed Supreme Court Justice might look like, answers have been scarce. In reality, libertarians haven’t received much encouragement at all from the ticket when it comes to the Court. In an interview with his running mate Bill Weld, Johnson’s VP actually suggested that they would perhaps look to justices like Stephen Breyer or Merrick Garland.

For libertarians, such choices are unacceptable. Breyer, a current justice, is a big-government liberal on most issues. Garland, a current Obama nominee, can’t even claim liberal heritage on civil-libertarian issues. Thankfully, Johnson is clarifying on this issue.

Recently, conservative journalist Guy Benson grilled Johnson and Weld on how they would gauge potential Court Justices. This time, the answer was more encouraging. To start, Johnson informed Benson that, “Weld has backed away from [Breyer and Garland].” So far, so good.

Additionally, Johnson said, “Although we don’t have litmus tests…Kelo really stands out as a litmus test, in my opinion.” This is more good news for libertarians. In the 2005 case, Kelo v. City of New London, the Supreme Court strengthened the power of eminent domain. In short, land was taken from one set of private hands and given to another in the name of “economic development.”

Interestingly enough, Justice Breyer played a key part in laying down the decision. Fortunately, Johnson and Weld seem to have reversed course in favor of a liberty-minded Supreme Court. Kelo was an epic overreach on the Court’s part that further empowered the state to seize private property.

Johnson is Right to Oppose This Unjust Decision

No matter what parameters limit eminent domain, it will always be controversial. It inherently means that the state can take your stuff, as long as you receive “just compensation.” That term within itsself is arbitrary and means very little. The government can almost always make it mean whatever it wants.

Since people value things differently. It’s not hard to see how bargaining conflicts can arise. It’s impossible to measure subjective value. For the government, it never knows when individuals are inflating the worth of their property.

From a libertarian perspective, the government should have to purchase property the same way as everyone else. Property should be purchased on the private marketplace and without coercion.

Johnson may be the only hope for reigning in Kelo. If you ask Donald Trump, he’ll tell you that eminent domain is “a wonderful thing.” That’s hardly a libertarian tagline.

Trump has routinely benefited from eminent domain, and it should be no surprise given his line of work. It is a tool of the rich and powerful at the expense of the poor and middle class.

Johnson may be poised to attract some more libertarians with his answers on the issue. For those concerned with the state-taking of private property, Trump may find himself out of luck.