[Defiant]

The takings clause applies to the states, too, since 1897.

[muawiyah]

Two parts to 'takings" ~ (1) just compensation, and as you've noted that's been around for a good while, and (2) public purpose ~ and when kelo v. was announced by the Court only a handful of states hedged in what that meant, but a short time after kelo v. 42 states had hedged it in.

Still the same 'clause' ~ but now statutorily better defined.

The USSC didn't go any further than most states did at the time ~ and earlier urban renewal cases were certainly murky.

Like to note that when USPS or DOD decide they need land for buildings people fall over themselves trying to sell them all sorts of land. Rarely does either agency ever need to resort to eminent domain. During my many decades at USPS there was only one time it was used and that was due to a landlord who did not provide agreed upon maintenance ~ which is another lesson, namely, if you rent property to the US government they can go after you with eminent domain so make sure you crank your legal defense costs into the up front estimation on the rent!