This decision greatly affects land trusts, especially in urban areas. No matter which tools the land trust uses, their property rights are no longer protected from private interests. More importantly, land trust holdings have two characteristics that make them more susceptible to government assisted private development than most urban land: 1. They generate little tax revenue for local governments and 2. Few, if any, buildings, businesses, or families need to be removed before development begins.

Unfortunately, I cannot seem to link to the current quick poll on CNN. Of nearly 140,000 votes on the site, 65% think that local government should never be able to seize homes and businesses, 33% think that homes and businesses should be seizable for public use, and only 1% think they should be seizable for private economic development. Even though the poll isn't a scientific one, it seems that the Supreme Court was pretty far out of step with the views of the common man in the Kelo decision today.

Hi. What about the implications of Kelo for regulatory takings litigation?

Also, invite you to read some interesting background on Thomas and environmental matters. This may not have been published before today. Link:
http://kaspit.typepad.com/weblog/2005/06/devra_lee_davis.html

Your site is a terrific resource.
Thanks muchly,

Kaspit