[Mr Ramsbotham]

I can't keep up anymore.

I was having a bit of trouble myself. What's happened is that certain "conservatives," in order to justify their mindless support of a certain candidate, have painted themselves and everybody else into a corner on the subject of eminent domain, to the point where its Constitutional meaning and purpose have been rendered completely worthless.

[Political Junkie Too]

Yes, the problem with eminent domain for public good is that the "good" is speculative. It often doesn't pan out as increased tax revenues, at least the high profile ones haven't. The business never gets built, the casino goes bankrupt, the economy turns, etc.

I thought the Supreme Court was supposed to decide on the facts and actual harm, not on the promise of some risky future benefit.

-PJ

[Fhios]

It’s just a factor of creeping government. Yes ID is about for the good of the public — which one immediately recognizes are roads, hospitals basically infrastructure.

Some courts have allowed this to to creep into *any* public good, like removing houses from a blighted area to build factories, or casino parking lots, or deciding that a tax exempt church should be moved for a business that generates taxes and provides jobs.

All of which have perfect examples of being reasonable and perfect examples of being abuse.