Not In My Barn Yard Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Thompson, Glenn [R-PA-15]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Aug 20, 2026
Bottom line
The bill aims to protect agricultural land from federal eminent domain actions by requiring federal agencies to identify and utilize feasible alternatives, thereby strengthening property rights for farmers and landowners.
What it actually does
This bill prohibits the Federal Government from exercising eminent domain over agricultural land if a feasible alternative exists for the public use for which the land is sought. It defines agricultural land to include farming, ranching, forestry, or timber production, with specific exclusions for very small, low-revenue plots. The prohibition does not apply to eminent domain actions that commenced before the bill's enactment.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue this bill is essential for protecting vital agricultural resources and private property rights from federal overreach. They contend it ensures that federal projects only acquire farmland as a last resort, preserving the nation's food security, rural livelihoods, and the economic stability of farming communities.
Opponents contend
Opponents might argue that this bill could unduly complicate or delay critical national infrastructure projects, such as pipelines, transmission lines, or highways, that require federal eminent domain authority. They may contend that it could increase project costs, hinder national development, or create significant legal challenges over the definition of 'feasible alternative'.
The bill is exceptionally short and clearly written, making it highly accessible for any reader to understand its core provisions quickly and evaluate its implications.
Section 2(a)
Prohibition on Federal Eminent Domain Over Agricultural Land
This section prohibits the Federal Government from using eminent domain to acquire agricultural land if there is another practical and achievable option for the public project that does not involve taking that specific agricultural property. This means federal agencies must first explore and confirm that no feasible alternative exists before condemning farmland for public use.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision is crucial for safeguarding family farms and ranches from being displaced by federal projects, ensuring that agricultural production is not unnecessarily disrupted. It reinforces property rights and encourages responsible, less impactful federal planning.
Critics contend
Critics might contend that this requirement could significantly delay or increase the cost of essential federal infrastructure projects, such as new energy transmission lines or transportation routes, by forcing agencies to pursue less efficient or more expensive alternatives, or by creating grounds for prolonged legal challenges over what constitutes a 'feasible alternative'.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances the protection of private agricultural land and property rights against the federal government's need to acquire land for public use projects, potentially introducing complexities and delays in project development.
Section 2(c)
Definition of 'Agricultural Land'
This section defines 'agricultural land' as land in the United States currently used, or used within the last five years, for farming, ranching, forestry, or timber production. It specifically excludes small parcels (under ten acres) if their annual gross receipts from agricultural products do not exceed $1,000, preventing very small, non-commercial plots from falling under the protection.
Section 2(b)
Non-Retroactivity for Pending Eminent Domain Actions
This section clarifies that the prohibition on eminent domain over agricultural land does not apply to any eminent domain proceedings that began before the date this Act becomes law. This means ongoing federal land acquisition projects are not affected by the new rules, ensuring legal stability for existing processes.