"I don't find this all that new. I remember when eminent domain was
threatened so that a developer building a skyscraper in downtown
Philadelphia can demolish some established privately owned businesses.

This ended up not playing out in court, but few expected the developer
to
be unable to legally win. This happened in the mid 1980's, and the
skyscraper in question was One Lberty Place - privately owned.

And it sure appeared to me then that there have been times before when

eminent domain was used to make way for privately owned skyscrapers. "


You're right that having governments use eminent domain to take private
property for projects being done by private developers is nothing new.
It has been done before. The problem here is that until now, it was
somewhat of a grey area. While municipalities were doing it, no one
was certain if it was constitutional or would stand up to a court
challenge. Now the SC has given it a very broad endorsement, basicly
a green light. That is what is troubling, as it will greatly expand
the scope of it being done.

Here in NJ, Long Branch has done exactly this to force people to sell
private homes near the ocean to a developer for a beachfront
redevelopment. The developer will be demolishing perfectly fine modest
single family homes to put up expensive condos. Long Branch is in mon
cty, where the feds recently concluded a sting investigation where they
arrested two mayors, about 7 council members, and a host of others for
taking bribes, complete with vidoe tapes and audio. In a seperate
investigation they arrested the former mayor of Marlboro, who has
pleaded guilty to taking $250K in bribes from a developer to get zoning
changes and approval for homes the builder built. The builder has been
arrested too. There have been many other arrests here and I
understand there are plenty of corruption investigations going on in
Phil too.

I think you see my point. With the green light to allowing govts to
take private property for any purpose they deem worthwhile, a new
avenue ripe for corruption and abuse is now wide open. A developer can
make a homeowner an offer for property, with the implied threat, either
take it or I'll get my buddy politicians to take it from you for less.