Well, this sucks...
The Supreme Court has just upheld an egregious expansion of what can be considered "eminent domain" takings.
Such property seizures in the past have had to be justified by a "public use" requirement. Now, apparently, anything that might augment tax revenues qualifies as "public use" -- in other words, practically anything at all.
I wonder whether the liberals who always raise the specter of the erosion of our rights under a "conservative" Supreme Court will still feel the same way when their houses have been bulldozed to make room for a strip mall.
Dissenting in the 5-4 split were Justices O'Connor, Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas.