'A fight at every step': Trump's wall will have to battle the people who live there

yahoo finance ^ | 11/26/19 | Adriana Belmonte

[central_va]

President Trump declared a national emergency in February in his most direct attempt to secure the funding for his signature campaign promise: a “big, beautiful” wall along the U.S.-Mexican border.

But even if he gets the billions of more dollars he would need to be the border wall — which is actually a combination of vehicle barriers and pedestrian fencing — the massive construction project faces a major hurdle, according to legal experts: The people who live along the border may not want to give their land up to the government.

[central_va]

Total crock of Barbara Streisand. The USA built thousands of miles of interstate highways all over the USA in the 50's and 60's and it wasn't a battle for every bit of land for those project. In comparison the Interstate Highway system make the wall look like a big nothing.

[MNJohnnie]

“May not” More wishful thinking from the Democrat Fascist Propaganda machine

If they do want to play politics, there is a thing called “eminent domain” these political stooges might want to look up

[MNJohnnie]

The other thing the interstates when through very productive land. Most of the land right up against the border since it is an international border is not useful for anything. Landowners stand to make a profit on land that is mostly useless for them anyway.

[LeoWindhorse]

If I had a ranch property along the border I would be happy beyond belief that a wall was going up along the southern boundary of my property.
I’d be making plans to support the contractors and the works with sweet tea and meals. All the ice-cold water they could drink.
I’d be driving around with a bullhorn, saying “Thank You!”

What rancher in their right mind would prefer to have these invaders continue invading their property?

[lurk]

The wall and its attendant security road takes up maybe 50 yards. Plus the ranchers on the border live in danger every day. Sounds like more of the same hand wringing.

[Billthedrill]

"May not" want it? Wouldn't a genuine reporter ask them to find out how they feel instead of speculating?

Silly me. I suspect if the federal government said, "Fine, we'll build the wall everywhere else," and held the property owners responsible for what happens on their property thereafter, certain attitudes might change when their property becomes a superhighway for smugglers of both drugs and human beings. Volunteering to become a chokepoint in border security may not be what they had in mind.

I do note that the proggies have suddenly rediscovered the takings clause in the Fifth Amendment. If, for instance, just compensation for a confiscated firearm is a $50 Starbucks card, "just" being whatever the government says it is, then surely that should apply to eminent domain as well? I'd prefer neither to be the policy, but then I'm not a legal scholar.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

Well, would be kind of funny, if the wall went around their ranch, putting them on the Mexico side...

[gunnut]

The government already owns a 60 foot zone from the Mexican border in all of te states except Texas. They should be able to build a wall and road in large sections of that without an issue. If we need more than 60 feet, then there could be court battles. It almost makes any suits moot because te main objection would be the wall and that should only take about 10 feet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roosevelt_Reservation

[txrefugee]

When you have thousands of unemployed Mexican lawyers trying to get their cut of any settlement with the government, it will be a long haul. It would be much simpler and cheaper for the military to lay landmines on the border.

[gunnut]

A free 8 read more, the Roosevelt Reservation is only on what was Federal and tribal lands. May still have some private lands not covered.

Many times eminent domain, the taking of te property happens fast, it is just the price that ends up in dispute.

[SuperLuminal]

"A fight at every step': Trump's wall will have to battle the people who live there"

This "Title" is clearly an intentional propaganda disconnect with the article statement below...

"The people who live along the border may not want to give their land up to the government."

IAC, we need verification that any land owner or tenant who "fights" is, in fact, a U.S. citizen...

[odawg]

About 70 years ago, I think, the state built a road across my grandpa’s 200 acre field, cut through it and claimed about a 100 foot right of way. He was not paid for it.

[oldvirginian]

“About 70 years ago, I think, the state built a road across my grandpa’s 200 acre field, cut through it and claimed about a 100 foot right of way. He was not paid for it.”

Similar happened to us when they paved the state route that ran through our place. They took land to straighten the road and never paid a penny.
We were just happy to have a paved road.

[Godzilla]

there should already be an easement along the border zone allowing the government access regardless of who owns the property.

[kiryandil]

The Mexican cartels are the defacto government on the border, because the border state Democrats are employees of the cartels.

[DoodleDawg]

What rancher in their right mind would prefer to have these invaders continue invading their property?

Depends on how much of their ranch they're going to be cut off from because of the wall I would imagine.

[DoodleDawg]

About 70 years ago, I think, the state built a road across my grandpa’s 200 acre field, cut through it and claimed about a 100 foot right of way. He was not paid for it.

He should have gotten a lawyer then.

[Rebelbase]

As with anything political if you have connections the outcome tends to the different..

When I-40 was built through Winston-Salem, NC it should have been a straight line through town. A connected business owner didn't want his buildings taken so the interstate was built curving around them and the famous Hawthorne curve was created. There's no telling how many people died in accidents on that section of road.

In the Western part of the state I-40 was planned to follow the French Broad river into TN which is the route of least topographical resistance. The politically connected owned the river bottoms which would have been consumed by the road so it was shifted to its current location running through Smoky Mountains. This route is geologically unsuited for such a road and like clockwork a couple of times a year the road is closed due to landslides.

[Rebelbase]

“I’d be driving around with a bullhorn, saying “Thank You!””

I’d be blaring Kid Rock’s American Bad Ass.