How did the Supreme Court ruling in the Susan Kelo et al., Petitioners, v. City of New London, Connecticut, et al. (Kelo) case influence the government's ability to exercise eminent domain?

What will be an ideal response?

The Supreme Court of the United States reversed the lower court's decision and allowed the city of New London to acquire property using condemnation. Outrage over the decision in this case led many states to pass legislation to protect private property rights and limit the government's ability to condemn property. In fact, shortly after Kelo was decided, a survey by the Saint Index, a polling organization specializing in land use issues, found that 81 percent of Americans opposed the decision. Since Kelo, more than 40 states have passed legislation limiting the government's ability to take private property and give it to private business. Some of these laws have included tightening the definition of public use or closing loopholes such as vague definitions of "blight." In 2005, the House of Representatives introduced a bill to prevent "economic development" from being used to justify giving property to private business under eminent domain. It stalled in the Senate; a similar bill was introduced in the summer of 2007, but died without passage at the end of the year. In June of 2006, President Bush banned federal agencies from using eminent domain solely for "private development," but allowed takings for private owners who promise to use the land for both private and "public" development.