WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HD 1325

Proposal for a legislative amendment to the Constitution prohibiting eminent domain takings

194th Legislature (2025-2026) Introduced by David DeCoste and 3 co-sponsors

Constitutional amendment prohibiting government eminent domain seizures would restrict infrastructure projects but strengthen individual property rights against forced land takings.

0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HD 1325

Legislative bill overview

HD 1325 proposes a constitutional amendment to Massachusetts's Constitution that would prohibit or severely restrict the government's use of eminent domain—the power to take private property for public use with compensation. This amendment would override or substantially limit the existing constitutional and legal framework that currently permits such takings under specified conditions.

Why is this important

Eminent domain is a foundational governmental power used for infrastructure projects (highways, utilities, schools, hospitals) that benefit the public but require land assembly. Restricting or eliminating this power would fundamentally affect the state's ability to undertake major development projects, potentially requiring alternative land acquisition methods that are more time-consuming and expensive. This issue affects property owners, developers, municipalities planning infrastructure, and taxpayers who fund public projects.

Potential points of contention

  • Infrastructure development delays: Prohibiting eminent domain could make it prohibitively difficult or impossible to complete highways, public transit, utility expansions, and other infrastructure requiring consolidated land parcels, potentially stalling economic development and public services.
  • "Public use" definition disputes: Current law already limits takings to legitimate public purposes, and disagreement exists about whether further restrictions are necessary or whether existing protections are adequate.
  • Property rights vs. public good balance: The amendment represents a significant shift toward individual property rights over collective public needs, raising questions about whether compensation alone adequately addresses this competing interest or whether project viability matters.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.