This is not good folks:

WASHINGTON - Cities may bulldoze people's homes to make way for shopping malls or other private development, a divided Supreme Court ruled Thursday, giving local governments broad power to seize private property to generate tax revenue.

Fortunately, almost everyone seems to agree that this ruling is a terrible, terrible thing. For an excellent roundup, visit Arguing With Signposts." He tracks 56+ bog reactions accross the politcal spectrum. Interesting stuff. People on the Left and Right are PISSED.

Dave at Gristmill has a good summary on why this sucks so bad:

[S]imply put, government can take private property for any %$! reason it feels like it.

Now, it's true: Having a mall and some condos is probably more beneficial to the community than having a few small, low-income private residences. It will generate more taxes, and probably lead to more economic development.

But follow that line of thinking even briefly and you get into scary territory. It is, after all, the case that taking any private property and replacing with any more tax-generating property is beneficial to the community in this way. If your house is sitting where some rich developer wants to build a mall, why can't the government boot you out and give your property to him? Because you're white? Middle class? Well-connected? You better hope so.

He also quotes O'Connor's dissent which is definately worth reading:

Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random. The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms . As for the victims, the government now has license to transfer property from those with fewer resources to those with more.

Wal-mart, anyone?