I blame the Democrats for this decision. Why? The answer is can be summed up in one word: BORK.
Robert Bork, a highly distinguished and extremely qualified legal scholar, was vilified by the Democrats when Reagan nominated him to fill a Supreme Court vacancy. The nomination hearings in the Senate were so filled with character assasination, nasty innuendos and dirty tricks that a new verb was created - "to bork" someone is to run their name through the mud for political purposes.
After Bork's nomination failed in the Senate, due to the vilifying treatment he received, Reagan then nominated Kennedy, who was later confirmed.
I cannot fathom a Justice Bork siding on the wrong side of this decision - as Kennedy did.
So, whenever someone from DU or other leftist organization complains about this decision, remind them of Judge Bork and how this decision would have been different if he, and not Kennedy, were on the Supreme Court.
I don't think Mr. Bork is all that strong on private property rights in takings cases. I believe that in his popular book that he actually evinces some sympathy toward the "strong form of taking" side. However, I read it only once when it first came out, and my memory could be way off on that point.
Also, he might well put out a statement or opinion piece on this decision; I have done a few searches, but I haven't seen anything pop up yet.