[nygoose]

Like it or not, the constitution already seems to allow the taking of private property, with "just" compensation, whatever that is.

It's not for private use, only public use.

[AZLiberty]

Taking for private use isn't even mentioned, so apparently it's left up to the states and localities, which is the gist of of the Supreme Court opinion.

[BlackbirdSST]

It's not for private use, only public use.

The public use is what's been redefined. Now that means if it helps the town's finances, then it's a benefit to the public at large. Blackbird.