Across the United States, entire neighborhoods have disappeared not because residents wanted to leave, but because the land beneath them was declared more valuable for something else.
Highways. Universities. Stadiums. Industrial parks. “Blight removal.” Economic development.
Eminent domain—the government’s power to take private property for public use—has shaped American landscapes for more than a century. While the policy is race-neutral on paper, its impact has not been evenly distributed. Again and again, working-class communities and communities of color have paid the highest price for projects designed to serve broader—or wealthier—public interests.
Understanding these land loss stories helps explain why wealth gaps persist, why trust in public institutions eroded in many neighborhoods, and why displacement still feels like a familiar threat rather than a distant history.
Eminent domain allows governments to take private property for public use, provided they offer “just compensation.”
In theory, this power exists to support shared needs:
In practice, what counts as “public use” has expanded over time to include:
The result is a tool that can reshape entire communities—often permanently.
Land loss through eminent domain typically follows a familiar pattern:
What looks like a single project on a map can mean the end of a community built over generations.
Eminent domain has disproportionately affected:
These communities often had:
When land was taken, families didn’t just lose homes—they lost social networks, businesses, churches, and generational anchors.
Mid-20th century urban renewal programs used eminent domain aggressively.
Highways were routed directly through Black neighborhoods. Downtown districts were cleared for redevelopment. Entire business corridors vanished.
For many residents, “urban renewal” felt less like investment and more like removal.
The phrase “Negro removal,” used by critics at the time, reflected how predictably displacement followed racial lines.
For Indigenous communities, eminent domain echoes a much longer history of forced removal.
Infrastructure projects, pipelines, dams, and resource extraction have repeatedly overridden tribal land claims—often justified as necessary for national or economic interest.
Compensation rarely replaced what was lost: cultural ties, environmental stewardship, and sovereignty.
Many land takings are justified as engines of growth.
But studies show that displaced residents often:
The gains concentrate elsewhere. The losses remain local.
When families lose property, they lose one of the most reliable ways wealth is built and passed down.
Even when compensation is offered:
Land loss compounds the racial wealth gap across generations.
Despite displacement, communities have resisted and remembered.
These efforts preserve truth even when the land itself is gone.
Eminent domain decisions shape more than infrastructure—they shape who belongs, who benefits, and who bears the cost of “progress.”
When land is taken, the effects last decades:
Understanding these stories helps communities ask better questions before development decisions are finalized.
Library of Congress — Urban Renewal & Housing
https://loc.gov/
National Museum of African American History & Culture — Housing & Displacement
https://nmaahc.si.edu/
Urban Institute — Displacement & Development
https://www.urban.org/
Native Land Digital — Indigenous Land History
https://native-land.ca/