- Unbeliebable: White House turns Bieber petition response into immigration screed
- Obama signs law denying Iran ambassador’s visa, but says law is ‘advisory’
- Mich. judge to laughing convicted killer: ‘I hope you die in prison’
- Man charged in Kansas City-area highway shootings
- Keystone XL pipeline still on hold after State Dept. decision
- Fla. man charged with killing 16-month-old son to play Xbox undisturbed
- Drones from the deep: Pentagon develops ocean-floor attack robots
- Michigan mayor slaps back atheists’ try to erect ‘reason station’ at city hall
- PHILLIPS: Where is the conservative establishment?
- 7.5-magnitude earthquake shakes southern Mexico
BB&T opposes eminent domain
BB&T; Corp., the second-biggest bank in the Washington area, said yesterday that it will not lend money to developers who plan to build commercial projects on land taken from private citizens through the power of eminent domain.
“The idea that a citizen’s property can be taken by the government solely for private use is extremely misguided; in fact, it’s just plain wrong,” said John Allison, the bank’s chairman and chief executive officer.
BB&T; Chief Credit Officer Ken Chalk said the North Carolina bank expects to lose only a tiny amount of business, but thinks it is obligated to take a stand on the issue.
“It’s not even a fraction of a percent,” he said. “The dollar amount is insignificant.” But, he added, “We do business with a large number of consumers and small businesses in our footprint. We are hearing from clients that this is an important philosophical issue.”
Mr. Chalk said he knows of no other large U.S. bank with a similar policy.
If other banks were to follow suit, it likely would stop developers from asking cities to obtain property through eminent domain, said Scott Bullock, a lawyer with the Institute of Justice in Arlington, a nonprofit group that advocates for property rights through legal action.
“This tells cities and developers that they need to choose other methods for development projects,” Mr. Bullock said. “There are ample methods that do not involve taking property against [residents’] will. They should be pursued and can be fully funded by banks and other financial institutions.”
Washington has obtained property through eminent domain at the Skyland Shopping Center in Southeast, which is being redeveloped by the National Capital Revitalization Corp. A spokeswoman for the development group said yesterday that BB&T; is not involved in that project.
The city also has used eminent domain to gain control of 14 acres at the site of a proposed baseball stadium for the Washington Nationals in Southeast. The stadium project is unlikely to be affected by BB&T;’s decision, since it is being financed through public money and an agreement with Deutsche Bank. Moreover, the stadium will be owned by the city rather than by a private entity.
In June, a divided Supreme Court ruled that cities may raze people’s homes to make way for shopping malls or other private development. The 5-4 decision gave local governments the power to seize private property in the name of increased tax revenue.
The ruling upheld a decision by the city of New London, Conn., to seize seven property owners’ land so developers could build a hotel and high-end condominiums to keep pharmaceutical giant Pfizer from expanding there.
Mr. Bullock, who represented homeowners in the New London case, called eminent domain unconstitutional.
“Hopefully, many others will follow suit and recognize that this is not the way business should be done in America,” he said.
The policy also will protect the assets of banks such as BB&T; by not tying up their money in projects that may draw political opposition, said Columbia University law professor Thomas Merrill, a specialist on eminent domain.
Mr. Merrill said he did not think there were many cases similar to the one that developed in New London.
Women losing coverage under Obamacare, too
- Scalia to students on high taxes: At a certain point, 'perhaps you should revolt'
- Former Ranger breaks silence on Pat Tillman death: I may have killed him
- Special Forces' suicide rates hit record levels casualties of 'hard combat'
- Feds approve powdered alcohol; 'Palcohol' available later this year
- EDITORIAL: Mark Warner running scared?
- Army goes to war with National Guard, seizes Apache attack helicopters
- Critics rail against liberal bias for commencement speakers
- Harry Reid blasts Bundy ranch supporters as 'domestic terrorists'
- EDITORIAL: More Lerner smoking-gun emails at IRS
- EDITORIAL: Republicans finally fight back in phony 'war on women'
Top 10 handguns in the U.S.