Eminent Domain follow-up

Today's Washington Times has a follow-up on the SCOTUS case yesterday about eminent domain. It concludes this way:

• Several justices appeared critical. As he started his argument, Mr. Horton said the "principle purpose of the takings clause is to provide just compensation." Before he could finish, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor interrupted, saying, "But it has to be for a valid public use."
  
  Justice O'Connor then asked whether a city could force the sale of a Motel 6 if the city thought that "if it had a Ritz-Carlton it would get higher taxes."
  
  Added Justice Antonin Scalia: "Taking property from someone who doesn't want to sell it, does that count for nothing?"

I pray that the Lord reaches into the souls of 5 Justices and supplies the wisdom to uphold private property rights in America.