My understanding (feel free to tell me I'm off the wall)...
Eminent Domain before 6/23:
* to transfer it to another private owner it had to be condemned... and yes, local officials had great leeway in what could be considered condemnable
* for truly public use (highways etc) any property could be taken (good or bad)
Since yesterday:
* any land can be transfered to another private owner without the need to condemn it first if it is for the "greater good" (yeah, that's specific)
Of cource compensation has to be paid - but market value, and value to an owner are two completely different things and once a government marks a property as being targeted for eminent domain it becomes unsellable to the owner and it is just a matter of court cases to define a $.
"Since yesterday:
* any land can be transfered to another private owner without the need to condemn it first if it is for the "greater good" (yeah, that's specific)"
The case says no such thing. Read it before posting again.
You are off the wall.
The majority opinion, (read it here : http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=04-108 ) is based on over a century of case law.
Even the dissenting Justices acknowledge it!