Remember the hero of the right Cliven Bundy??

[HomerJS]

So Trump wants to build peaches along the border after declaring a national emergency. Bundy became the hero of righties and Fox News when he stood up to the federal government when they showed up to collect grazing fees. For Trump to build peaches he needs to seize property along the border. What happens when some Cliven Bundy type rancher call his boys and arm themselves when the Feds show up to seize their land??

What will be the position of Fox News, right wing commentators and other right wing media?
What will be the position of the Trump loving sycophants here?

 

[Greenman]

Does private property run right up to the border? A person could literally step off of their land and into mexico? I had always assumed (based on no information at all) that there was a buffer zone between the two country's.

 

[trenchfoot]

Not to worry Homer. Those members of these Bundy Brigade type "patriots" that put up a fuss will be "taken care of" to smooth things over. It's the tried and true Trump/Nat'l Enquirer method made famous from squashing "minor problems" with prostitutes and Playboy bunnies. Trump will exploit their self-proclaimed status as patriots and keepers of the true pioneer spirit that made America what it is this very day where the Repub Party is at its zenith in popularity and power and then seal the deals by telling them about the benefits of being a loyal patriotic "Real American". lol

If Trump ever gets the wall funding from us taxpayers that, heh, Mexico will "eventually pay for", there ain't a thing in the world that's going to get in the way of his keeping that idiotic plainly bullshit campaign promise he made to his......erm, shit, I don't know what to call them anymore because as a gathering, the core of Trump's base defy description as anything that is warm blooded and has the ability to survive a confrontation with a pissed off cornered liberal fully loaded with the facts and the truth about what Trump and the Repub Party leadership actually see their base as.

"Useful idiots" sort'a comes to mind.

 

[Jaskalas]

Does private property run right up to the border? A person could literally step off of their land and into mexico? I had always assumed (based on no information at all) that there was a buffer zone between the two country's.

Probably quite a bit of legacy private land held over from before we formally had a border.

 

[alien42]

Does private property run right up to the border? A person could literally step off of their land and into mexico? I had always assumed (based on no information at all) that there was a buffer zone between the two country's.

lol, you need to do some more research. there are plenty of Americans who own land that goes beyond the official border and "the walls" don't follow the exact border.

 

[cytg111]

Do they pay property tax to Mexico then?

 

[dawp]

Probably quite a bit of legacy private land held over from before we formally had a border.

plus they probably have an easement on the deed so the government can access the border, like when power or telephone companies have access to their lines so they can facilitate repairs.

 

[Thump553]

plus they probably have an easement on the deed so the government can access the border, like when power or telephone companies have access to their lines so they can facilitate repairs.

I think your guess is not based in reality. Easements are typically granted when Person A sells off a part of their land where there is something they want access to (like a well) and Person A formally retains an easement to that well in the deed they give Person B. A more typical situation these days is when a developer develops a subdivision and sets forth easements for power lines, etc. Again the easements arise because of an action by the grantor.

I don't see how the USA would have easements for border access unless they were the grantors at some point AND specifically and formally retained easements. Even then issues would arise as to the scope of the easement.

Everything I have read indicates there will be hundreds, if not thousands of eminent domain lawsuits against private property owners if the Trump Wall is to be built.

Remember too that native American rights are involved. Some native lands and reservations are on both sides of the border. A whole different can of worms.

But given how Trump voters see the exercise of eminent domain by the government as nearly as offensive as the black helicopter people confiscating their firearms, this won't happen, right?

In the real world, as opposed to a thirty second speech point, the devil is in the details. Trump has consistently shown that he has put next to no thought into the actualities of such a wall.

 

[pmv]

I bet the majority of anti-government types who support Trump will have little problem throwing the small minority of their brethren who might get caught up in the wall-related land-seizures 'under the bus'.

 

[K1052]

Does private property run right up to the border? A person could literally step off of their land and into mexico? I had always assumed (based on no information at all) that there was a buffer zone between the two country's.

In some cases I think it does however my understanding is that the projected path of "the wall" doesn't hew exactly to the border for a variety of physical reasons and instead cuts across a ton of private land, effectively stranding big chunks of it on the other side. As an example it was recently discovered that the wall would literally cut through the new SpaceX launch facility in Boca Chica potentially imperiling the entire operation.

 

[brycejones]

Does private property run right up to the border? A person could literally step off of their land and into mexico? I had always assumed (based on no information at all) that there was a buffer zone between the two country's.

Yes private property goes up to the border. Also the wall will not always built at exactly the border but inside of it sometimes substantially inside of it. Even today with existing sections of border barrier there are places where people have property on the wrong side.

 

[dawp]

I think your guess is not based in reality. Easements are typically granted when Person A sells off a part of their land where there is something they want access to (like a well) and Person A formally retains an easement to that well in the deed they give Person B. A more typical situation these days is when a developer develops a subdivision and sets forth easements for power lines, etc. Again the easements arise because of an action by the grantor.

I don't see how the USA would have easements for border access unless they were the grantors at some point AND specifically and formally retained easements. Even then issues would arise as to the scope of the easement.

Everything I have read indicates there will be hundreds, if not thousands of eminent domain lawsuits against private property owners if the Trump Wall is to be built.

Remember too that native American rights are involved. Some native lands and reservations are on both sides of the border. A whole different can of worms.


But given how Trump voters see the exercise of eminent domain by the government as nearly as offensive as the black helicopter people confiscating their firearms, this won't happen, right?

In the real world, as opposed to a thirty second speech point, the devil is in the details. Trump has consistently shown that he has put next to no thought into the actualities of such a wall.

I've lived in homes that had power and phone lines running along the back of the lot that had easements for the companies so they could access them and i'm sure the government has something similar.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

lol, you need to do some more research. there are plenty of Americans who own land that goes beyond the official border and "the walls" don't follow the exact border.

They'll own land that they can't access. How Trump.

 

[SlowSpyder]

I'm glad the OP could take time away from manufacturing racism (a guy had an old book in his office.. racist!) to make this even better thread.

 

[brycejones]

I'm glad the OP could take time away from manufacturing racism (a guy had an old book in his office.. racist!) to make this even better thread.

So kind of you take a break from your anti smoking crusade to fill us in.

 

[IronWing]

The border is a mix of federal and private landholdings. The federal lands were reserved in 1907 to preclude development that would obstruct the border. Most of the private borderlands are in Texas as lands there didn't come into the U.S. as federal (public domain) lands.

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

 

[HomerJS]

I'm glad the OP could take time away from manufacturing racism (a guy had an old book in his office.. racist!) to make this even better thread.

I guess that means you have some well thought out bits of wisdom on the subject. So enlighten us.

 

[pmv]

So kind of you take a break from your anti smoking crusade to fill us in.

You mean his war on logic, honesty and reason?

 

[Thump553]

I've lived in homes that had power and phone lines running along the back of the lot that had easements for the companies so they could access them and i'm sure the government has something similar.

I covered that-those are express (written, signed by the property owner and recorded) easements, probably granted at the time your property was developed.

If the USA doesn't have an express easement that covers the planned wall uses their only choices are: (1) purchase of a voluntary easement from the current property owner or (2) forced taking of the easement via eminent domain.

 

[cytg111]

I'm glad the OP could take time away from manufacturing racism (a guy had an old book in his office.. racist!) to make this even better thread.

No. You are the racist Slow. You are the racist. Racist bigoted human garbage .

 

[Jaskalas]

I've lived in homes that had power and phone lines running along the back of the lot that had easements for the companies so they could access them and i'm sure the government has something similar.

Would it be much of a stretch, or violation, for the United States to exert that "right" to access and control the border?
I'd say not. It is literally national security. Whether it is a wise use is another matter.

 

[Thump553]

Would it be much of a stretch, or violation, for the United States to exert that "right" to access and control the border?
I'd say not. It is literally national security. Whether it is a wise use is another matter.

National security concerns (IF proven) could I'm sure be a basis for involuntary taking (eminent domain) but still the Fifth Amendment prohibits taking of property without adequate compensation (bolded part below). I handled a few eminent domain cases-they tend to be fairly lengthy litigation.

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

 

[Jhhnn]

Would it be much of a stretch, or violation, for the United States to exert that "right" to access and control the border?
I'd say not. It is literally national security. Whether it is a wise use is another matter.

Oh, please. The Wall isn't about national security at all, unless you think that migrants seeking a better life in this country are a national security threat. They're not in it to do us harm, at all.

 

[DarthKyrie]

Oh, please. The Wall isn't about national security at all, unless you think that migrants seeking a better life in this country are a national security threat. They're not in it to do us harm, at all.

Don't you know ISIS is going to invade via Mexico? You just need to forget that the Mexican Cartels would unite and would never allow it to happen because it would disrupt their business. On the plus side if it did happen they could have a beheading war, ISIS with their swords and the Cartels with their chainsaws, something tells me those ISIS bitches would be running scared after seeing their brethren having their heads cut off with a chainsaw. It isn't a pretty sight, I have seen the videos released by the Cartels.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

I honestly don't know a single person that would defend the Bundy's and their redneck shit. Not sure if others here would - but I certainly won't.

Don't throw us all in one bucket.