The Historical Significance of Railroads in America
The railroad has long been a cornerstone of American progress, dating back to its transformative role in the 1800s. Trains revolutionized transportation, connecting the country and enabling the movement of people and goods across vast distances in a fraction of the time it took previously. This historic role is why railroads, despite being privately owned, have often been granted powers similar to those of public utilities, such as power companies or public schools. These powers include the ability to claim land through eminent domain, a tool typically reserved for projects benefiting the public good.
In the small town of Sparta, Georgia, this centuries-old legal precedent is now at the heart of a heated dispute. Blaine Smith, his wife Diane, his brother Mark, and Mark’s wife Janet are fighting to protect their family’s land—a three-quarter-mile strip that has been in their family since the era of slavery. The Sandersville Railroad Company, a private entity, wants to use this land to build a new 4-mile rail line that would connect to a nearby rock quarry and other businesses. The railroad argues this project would boost the local economy and create jobs, but the Smiths see it as an infringement on their heritage and rights.
A Family’s Stand Against History and Progress
For the Smith family, this land is more than just property—it’s a piece of their history. One of their great-grandmothers, born into slavery in 1861, lived on what was then the Dixon plantation near Sparta. Over generations, the family worked tirelessly to purchase and preserve over 600 acres of land, a legacy that their ancestors fought to protect. James Adolf Smith, the family patriarch, instilled in his children the importance of never selling the land. “From his dying bed, he said, ‘You’ll keep the property in the family,’” Blaine Smith recounted.
Now, the family is determined to honor that promise. Diane and Blaine Smith refuse to sell their land, even as the railroad company insists the project will benefit the community. The new rail line, they argue, would primarily serve the interests of the quarry and the railroad, not the public. Janet Smith expressed her frustration, saying, “I feel that we were targeted, and this particular community was targeted, because it is a Black community.” She believes racism plays a role in the railroad’s decision to pursue their land.
The Railroad’s Vision for Economic Revival
Ben Tarbutton, president of the Sandersville Railroad Company, sees the project as a much-needed economic boost for rural Georgia. He emphasizes the importance of the quarry, which supplies aggregate rock used in construction materials like asphalt and concrete. With the passage of the 2021 infrastructure bill, demand for such materials has surged, making the extension of the rail line a critical step in meeting national needs. Tarbutton argues that the new line could create at least a dozen permanent jobs and ease the burden on local roads by reducing truck traffic.
However, the Smiths remain unconvinced. They argue that the railroad’s offer for their land is insufficient and that the proposed crossings would disrupt their ability to farm and access their property. Tarbutton maintains that the railroad has treated the family fairly, stating, “We didn’t know who the property owners were at that time, much less what they look like.” He denies any accusations of racism, insisting the project is solely about improving infrastructure and economic opportunities.
The Power of Eminent Domain and Its Controversies
At the heart of this conflict is the issue of eminent domain, a legal tool that allows private companies or the government to seize private property for public use. Historically, this power has been used for projects like highways, schools, and parks—endeavors that clearly benefit the public. However, the Smiths argue that the railroad’s project does not meet this standard, as it primarily serves private business interests rather than the broader community.
The issue of eminent domain gained national attention in 2005 with the Supreme Court case Kelo v. City of New London. In that case, the court ruled that economic development could justify the use of eminent domain, allowing a private company to build a research facility on land taken from homeowners. The decision was widely criticized, and the facility was never built. Now, the Institute for Justice, the legal group that represented Susette Kelo, is assisting the Smiths pro bono in their fight. Mike Greenberg, an attorney with the institute, believes this case could be the one to overturn the Kelo decision.
A Legal Battle with Far-Reaching Implications
The Smiths’ case is now before the Georgia state Supreme Court after a lower court ruled in favor of the railroad. Judge Craig L. Schwall expressed sympathy for the family, stating, “If I ruled from what I thought was morally right, I would absolutely rule in your favor.” However, he ultimately ruled in favor of the railroad, citing the law. The Smiths are hopeful that a higher court will consider the moral and historical significance of their land.
Diane Smith summed up the family’s resolve: “I want people to remember that this is America, where we are always given the right to freedom. And not be encumbered with other people coming in and trying to take away or steal that little piece of serenity.” For the Smiths, this is not just a fight over land—it’s a fight to preserve their legacy and protect their community from what they see as injustice.
The Broader Fight for Property Rights and Justice
The Smiths’ story is part of a larger conversation about property rights, eminent domain, and racial equity. While the railroad company frames the project as a necessary step for economic growth, the Smiths see it as a continuation of systemic racism and the exploitation of Black communities. Their case highlights the tension between private enterprise and individual rights, raising questions about when and how eminent domain should be used.
As the Smiths await a decision from the Georgia Supreme Court, their case could set a precedent for future battles over property rights. Win or lose, they have already made their voices heard, ensuring that their ancestors’ legacy and their community’s story are not forgotten. This fight is not just about a piece of land—it’s about the principles of fairness, justice, and the enduring importance of preserving history.
