[Ken H]

Also, you'll hear a lot about how the states should pass legislation protecting homeowners. . . won't work. All a grifting developer has to do is appeal, invoke Kelo (stare decisis) and the 14th amendment.

I agree this is a horrendous decision, but ED/private property protections are still an available option for States. From the majority opinion:

"We emphasize that nothing in our opinion precludes any State from placing further restrictions on its exercise of the takings power. Indeed, many States already impose "public use" requirements that are stricter than the federal baseline."

[tumblindice]

Not sure if they still use a "rational relationship to a legitimate state interest" test, but I can assure you that if `push comes to shove', and another developer complains that some stubborn homeowners are `standing in the way of progress', you will see a federal appeals court enforcing Kelo. That stuff you cited from the majority opinion was just window-dressing.
And that's why developers are ecstatic and so many middle-class Americans are unhappy with them.

[tumblindice]

more fun with federalism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/premption_of_state_and_local_laws_in_the_united_states
Sure, the preemption doctrine is limited to statutes.
The SCOTUS wouldn't provide that hopeful language in their opinion, then ride rough-shod over states rights by accepting an appeal, even though a state statute bore a rational relationship to a legitimate state interest: preventing developers from making tax-payers--granted, they pay less taxes than the new development would pay--homeless?
Would they?

[Necrovore]

I think that the whole uproar is that everyone knows that local municipalities cannot be trusted. They are money grubbing scum that look at nothing else but raising their tax bases.