The United States Constitution generally limits eminent domain (the government forcing private property owners to sell their property to the government) to situations where the government is taking the property for public use (or the public good).However, in Kelo v. City of New London, the US Supreme Court held that "economic development" was a public use that justified using eminent domain to take private property.In the specific case, the City of New London forced the sale of Ms. Kelo's home so that a private drug company could build a new facility.Locally to STL - the decision to locate the Department of Defense National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency to North City St. Louis hinged on the City of St. Louis using eminent domain to evict all of the individual property owners so that the intelligence agency could be built.Notably, there were alternative locations to build the intelligence agency that would not require evicting any property owners but the City of St. Louis would lose out on substantial amounts of tax revenue.

Do you think the outcome in the City of New London was the right outcome?What about the situation with the Intelligence agency?Why might these two situations be different?