The new House eminent domain amendment almost certainly will accomplish nothing. There's no teeth to the amendment for it to take a bite out of eminent domain abuse. The amendment's language prohibits the government from taking private property except for a "public use." Here's the catch though. The Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution also limits takings for a "public use," as do many state constitutions. Courts interpret the term "public use" to mean "public purpose" or "public benefit," which are much broader in scope, thereby allowing the eminent domain abuse that is so common. This abuse includes allowing the government to take private property for private economic development. For example, if the government thinks your house should be seized and the property used for an Applebee's, that would be constitutional.