Wall Street Journal on Kelo
This is an excellent explanation of the decision, the dissents by O'Connor and Thomas, and why developers who are cozy with local governments now have free reign to profit by snatching your land. Market price now goes out the window. Owners of valuable property will be low-balled by well-connected developers who can now threaten to take the property and have a judge set the price. I think this is one of the worst USSC decisions in decades.
Libertarians must be furious. They just saw the USSC hand them their head in Raich v. Gonzales, the medical marijuana case that says there is no practical limit to the commerce clause (see last paragraph of snippet that follows), and now this. I wonder if libertarians can use these cases to make some headway as a third party? What's the point of sticking with the Republicans if you end up with justices like Kennedy, who won't respect limits on government that are actually written into the constitution?

The Supreme Court's "liberal" wing has a reputation in some circles as a guardian of the little guy and a protector of civil liberties. That deserves reconsideration in light of yesterday's decision in Kelo v. City of New London. The Court's four liberals (Justices Stevens, Breyer, Souter and Ginsburg) combined with the protean Anthony Kennedy to rule that local governments have more or less unlimited authority to seize homes and businesses....
So, in just two weeks, the Supreme Court has rendered two major decisions on the limits of government. In Raich v. Gonzales the Court said there are effectively no limits on what the federal government can do using the Commerce Clause as a justification. In Kelo, it's now ruled that there are effectively no limits on the predations of local governments against private property.