Was Sandra Day O'Connor in the majority on Kelo? If so, the people who lost on that case should file a request for rehearing as soon as Roberts is confirmed, and have that be the first case reversed by the newly constituted court. It would be a good example of what happens when out of control judges are replaced by real judges. I could just see Justice Roberts writing some sarcastic and witty opinion about how "public use" doesn't mean "private use".
NO.
She had this to say.
Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random. The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms. As for the victims, the government now has license to transfer property from those with fewer resources to those with more. The Founders cannot have intended this perverse result. “[T]hat alone is a just government,” wrote James Madison, “which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his own.” For the National Gazette, Property, (Mar. 29, 1792), reprinted in 14 Papers of James Madison 266 (R. Rutland et al. eds. 1983).
I would hold that the takings in both Parcel 3 and Parcel 4A are unconstitutional, reverse the judgment of the Supreme Court of Connecticut, and remand for further proceedings.
O’Connor, J., dissenting
http://straylight.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/04-108.ZD.html