There would be fireworks if a local government tried to take control of a piece of private property for private development, said Pat Stewart, a Morgantown Realtor.
"I've got a hunch there will be a real fight when it happens. I think it is totally out of line," Stewart said of the Supreme Court's decision last month in Kelo v. City of New London (Conn.).
In a 5-4 ruling, the Supreme Court said municipalities have broad power to acquire private property and transfer ownership to private developers — to put up shopping malls or other development — to generate tax revenue.
The decision drew a scathing dissent from Justice Sandra Day O'Connor as favoring rich corporations.
In light of the Supreme Court's decision, West Virginia political leaders and lawmakers are scrambling to find protection for private property owners through state legislation or letters to Congress.
Two Mon County delegates say they are against the Supreme Court decision. But they have different starting points for change.
Delegate Cindy Frich, R-Monongalia, has already requested that a state bill be drafted that would create a higher standard before municipalities can seize property.
"The state needs to define exactly what public use is. West Virginians think of roads, sewage systems and schools. We need to clearly define that in code," she said.
She urges residents to contact their legislators and Gov. Joe Manchin III with their concerns.
Delegate Bob Beach, D-Monongalia, said he plans to urge the state's congressional delegation to push for protection. "I think if there is an opportunity to change, that it will be at that level, not at the state level," he said.
Beach and some delegates from the southern part of the state are drafting a letter to members of Congress urging them to take some kind of action, legislative or otherwise, he said.
When asked what he would do if one of his constituents faced seizure of private property, he said, "I'd be right there alongside them, fighting, doing everything I could. If you are a farmer who has owned his property through two to three generations of your family, and a developer comes along to build a strip mall, you're pretty much out in the cold."
Rep. Alan Mollohan, D-W.Va., said he is not sure if the federal decision will override any future state law.
However, eight states — Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Maine, Montana, South Carolina and Washington — already forbid the use of eminent domain for economic development unless it is to eliminate blight, he said, citing a The Associated Press report.
Other states either expressly allow private property to be taken for private economic purposes or have not spoken clearly to the question.
Mollohan said Congress is at work on legislation to address the Supreme Court's decision.
The House of Representatives already passed a bill that would withhold federal transportation dollars for projects where the land was seized from private owners for private development.
Mollohan said he voted in favor of the bill that is now pending in the Senate.
Stewart, who said she doesn't yet know how the Supreme Court decision might affect the realty business, lauded the House of Representatives' efforts.
"If the bill passes and the president signs it, that will take care of it. It will be a moot point."
Delegate Mike Caputo, D-Marion, said he is researching whether new state legislation would be effective.
"When I was in Charleston yesterday (Tuesday), I talked to one of the attorneys in the bill drafting department to see if West Virginia has any protections in place, or if we even could provide some type of legislation to protect West Virginians," he said. "I'm in research mode on this." Caputo said several of his constituents are "upset and angry about the decision."
They are not yet worried that their property is in danger. "I just have a deep concern that we just certainly don't want this battle going on in West Virginia, and that citizens' rights should be protected at all cost," he said.
Manchin is also concerned about the Supreme Court decision, and has questions he wants answered, said Lara Ramsburg, Manchin's spokeswoman.
"The governor believes eminent domain should be used in only the most severe circumstances and when it benefits the public at large. If we have to take that step, then the people affected should have fair compensation," she said.