I hear this one all the time
In defense of Kelo, the argument used to justify it or to quell the masses usually goes something like this:
The Supreme Court in Kelo simply recognized that the State of Connecticut had made a series of legislative choices, spurred by aggressive lobbying from developers, that allowed local officials to take with just compensation private property and then turn the land over to private economic developers.
While that is true (and shame on them), there is also the issue that the bill of rights applies to state government’s as well. The fifth amendment states:
nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Private development is not public use. The significance of Kelo is that the supreme court had the chance to assert that the fifth amendment means something and it did not.