[justshutupandtakeit]

That ruling is not inconsistent with the fifth. You can argue about the definition of "public use" but the property owners are all compensated for the property at market prices. They are not losing anything just unhappy at being forced to sell.

I do agree that the Legislature should just ignore the ruling. Of course, I am a troublemaker interested in what would happen. I cannot see GWB sending in the federal Marshalls to enforce the ruling.

[muawiyah]

Of course its inconsistent with the fifth. There's the question of "just compensation", and market value for what the property would have been worth previously is not the same as the market value for what it's worth today now that we know what is planned to happen.

The USSC simply ignored the "just compensation" part and said the state of Connecticut can do what it wants.