[sinkspur]

I don't see anything in here that prohibits government from doing what it already does. "...advancing the economic interest of private parties " has already been defined by SCOTUS and time and again SCOTUS has decided for us that though private parties *might* benefit economically, the greater good will be served.

This prohibits the feds from any takings for private parties or private interest.

[JavaTheHutt]

This prohibits the feds from any takings for private parties or private interest.

Not if the federal agency in question already has been given the right to do so.

b) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) authority granted by law to a department or agency or the head thereof; or...

Actually, I'm not a lawyer, but it appears that this EO isn't really worth the paper it's written on.

[KoRn]

"This prohibits the feds from any takings for private parties or private interest."

But this doesn't apply to local governments, who have been abusing the most. I'm to the point of believing a constitutional amendment is needed to protect private property.