I wrote before that I thought the definition of interstate commerce in Raich was crazy, but maybe there is an upside. Under this ridiculously broad definition of interstate commerce (where growing marijuana in your backyard for persona consumption was called interstate commerce), couldn't a real estate development with tenants who are multi-state corporations also qualify?
Sen. Cornyn (R-TX) Proposes Limits on Eminent Domain:
Sen. Cornyn is introducing a federal bill (S. 1313, "The Protection of Homes, Small Businesses, and Private Property Act of 2005") that would bar "economic development" takings:
(a) . . . The power of eminent domain shall be available only for public use.
(b) . . . In this Act, the term "public use" shall not be construed to include economic development.
(c) . . . This act shall apply to (1) all exercises of eminent
domain power by the Federal Government; and (2) all exercises of
eminent domain power by State and local government through the use of
Part C is in there to help it pass constitutional muster, but maybe Raich makes this unnecessary.
PS- I am mostly kidding here - I in no way want to condone Raich.