[Amendment10]

The U.S. Supreme Court created a huge political backlash when it ruled that local governments could use eminent domain to seize private property and transfer it to other private owners for "economic development."

The USSC did nothing wrong by the federal Constitution when it decided Kelo in favor of the state.

The reason that the MSM got its panties bunched when the USSC decided Kelo in favor of the state is because the MSM swallows its own politically correct perversions of the Constitution. And the reason that the MSM was able to spook the people with the USSC's "wicked" decision is because neither do the people understand what the Constitution says - or doesn't say - about the eminent domain powers of the states.

The main constitutional misunderstanding with Kelo is that, unless otherwise stated, all general prohibitions on government power in the federal Constitution apply only to the federal government, not to the state governments.

For example, consider that, unlike the 5th A., Sec. 1 of the 15th A. explicitly prohibits both the federal government, aka the United States, and the states from prohibiting people from voting based on race.

15th Amendment, Sec. 1: The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

So regardless that the 5th A. limits the federal government to buying private land for public use, the states don't need an excuse to buy private land. But the states are finally wising up by making state laws to protect private property from state eminent domain grabs.

[vrwc1]

Text of the Fifth Amendment:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

According to your line of reasoning (that the prohibitions in this amendment only apply to the federal government) a US citizen can face double jeopardy in state courts, cannot "plead the fifth" in state courts, and can be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law by a US state.