I once heard a liberty-oriented radio host say that just compensation (for the taking of private property for public use) used to require the consent of the property owner.
While that may be, it wasn’t a requirement in the minds of those who drafted and ratified the Bill of Rights — the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
The proof of this is the explicit requirement of the consent of a real property owner in the Third Amendment:
“No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.“
The requirement of just compensation for the taking of private property for public use as specified in the Fifth Amendment is as follows:
“nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.“
If they had intended just compensation to mean consent, they would’ve said so, just as consent of the property owner is explicitly mentioned in the Third Amendment.
The taking of private property for private use, however, I’d argue, does require the consent of the property owner, according to the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and common law.
