[Churchjack]

From the sickening decision:

'Indeed, while many state courts in the mid-19th century endorsed "use by the public" as the proper definition of public use, that narrow view steadily eroded over time. Not only was the "use by the public" test difficult to administer (e.g., what proportion of the public need have access to the property? at what price?),7 but it proved to be impractical given the diverse and always evolving needs of society.'

Insane. Just insane.

[editor-surveyor]

"but it proved to be impractical given the diverse and always evolving needs of society"

Yes, the constitution is impractical, "given the diverse and always evolving needs of society."

Let's just throw it in the trash, along with Ellen Tausher's 'little blue dress.'

[lentulusgracchus]

"Indeed, while many state courts in the mid-19th century endorsed 'use by the public' as the proper definition of public use, that narrow view steadily eroded over time. ... given the diverse and always evolving needs of society." [Emphasis added].

Insane. Just insane.

No, it's classic "living Constitution"/"whatever I say it is" buncombe. This opinion could have been written by Al Gore. We have X41 to thank for this, who put David Souter on the Supreme Court.

Shakespeare got the spirit of it about right:

"The laws of England are in my mouth."