[TheBigB]

From the text of the decision...

"We emphasize that nothing in our opinion precludes any State from placing further restrictions on its exercise of the takings power. Indeed, many States already impose “public use” requirements that are stricter than the federal baseline. Some of these requirements have been established as a matter of state constitutional law, while others are expressed in state eminent domain statutes that carefully limit the grounds upon which takings may be exercised."

[SoCal Pubbie]

But what's to prevent the Utah legislature from changing the law say in twenty years or so? I say a Constitutional Amendment needs to be passed to reverse this SC decision.

[Huck]

Thanks.