[Southack]

Cutting off federal funds to cities that abuse eminent domain comes to mind.

City ABC takes Wal-Mart's buildings because a new city council doesn't like Wal-Mart, then City ABC loses all federal funds.

Build on this concept. Withhold federal funds for any city that defies federal laws by declaring itself a "free city" or a "safe zone" or that bans the Pledge or that bans officers from enforcing drug laws, etc.

[NittanyLion]

Withhold federal funds for any city that defies federal laws by declaring itself a "free city" or a "safe zone" or that bans the Pledge or that bans officers from enforcing drug laws, etc.

Or that bans officers from enforcing gun control laws?

Centralized power is a dangerous concept, which is why I imagine most conservatives are, well, conservative. While I applaud this EO, I can't say I agree with the concept of extorting localities via the withholding of federal funds.

[khnyny]

{City ABC takes Wal-Mart's buildings because a new city council doesn't like Wal-Mart, then City ABC loses all federal funds.]

I agree, cutting off Federal funds to local govs who abuse eminent domain is a good idea. That being said, it is usually a local gov taking property from Joe Schmoe and giving it to Walmart, Target, etc. Companies "invest" in the "community" by "donating" to local charities, etc., and develop cozy "relationships" with those people in decision making positions (or donate enough $$ to put people who do their bidding in those positions).

[DaveTesla]

The big question is weather the Federal government will
enforce the Constitution in respect to the local or state
actions. Generally I don't believe the Federal Government should
interfere in the actions of the state but when it comes to the
Constitution I believe the Federal government has an OBLIGATION
to do so.
This is just such a case.
Unfortunately this order only pertains to the taking by the Federal Government.

[sam_paine]

Cutting off federal funds to cities that abuse eminent domain comes to mind.

It may come to mind, but it's not included in the TEXT of this EO.