Canals, roads, highways, military installations, harbor improvements, etc. have all required the legitimate application of eminent domain and just compensation to the property owners for the PUBLIC good. I disagree with it being used to serve the interests of a private interest and, knowing how Atlantic City works, the aroma of public corruption and pay offs.
BFL.
That's exactly the logic behind Kelo and the over 100 years of court decisions (such as Berman v. Parker from 1954, specifically ruling on a case involving real estate development) and state action that mirrored Kelo. The courts had consistently ruled that private entities may receive private property in eminent domain-- even cities looking to developers to improve blighted areas-- provided there is a public good. If anything, the law has improved from more than a hundred years ago, since in the late 1800s the individual states were taking over run down orchards or hovels WITHOUT compensation.
I disagree with it being used to serve the interests of a private interest and, knowing how Atlantic City works, the aroma of public corruption and pay offs.
But then a bad use of eminent domain doesn't mean that there are no uses of eminent domain where it is appropriate and positive for the public good.