It’s a good decision. It’s also not new law – I believe this has been roughly the state of the law since the early '90’s at least. (It was certainly the case when I took my property class in 1998.) This ruling prevents lone holdouts from derailing an economic development plan that can bring tremendous benefits to the poor – better schools, better healthcare, better policing, more jobs, higher wages, etc., etc. The list goes on. As a liberal, of course I support that.
Yes, cities could abuse this power, but 1) that’s always the case with every thing any government actor does – it’s not a reason to prevent the appropriate exercise of the power. 2) It’s harder to abuse than you think – local governments, moreso than national ones, certinaly, are at the mercy of public whims. This is exactly the type of thing that can create a public outcry if a local government uses the power inappropriately, and that will force the elected officials to use it judiciously so as not to piss off a few hundred constituents, which in a city council race, is often going to be enough to tip an election. 3) The 5th Amendment further prevents local governments from abusing this power because it requires the owners of seized property to be given “just compensation.” Therefore, cities can’t use the power unless they’re willing to pay for it, and willing to give up other funding priorities to do it. Further, as we’ve seen in recent elections, there’s nothing the electorate likes more than lower taxes, so a government that overuses eminent domain is going to be replaced in short order by an administration that promises to stop spending money on eminent domain and “return it to the taxpayers.”
As a general rule, when liberals come to the Court, outside of a few areas (abortion and crime come to mind), we should be on the side of more regulation, not less. (Binary, I don’t mean to state that you’re a liberal, because I don’t know if you are or not, but your brief OP implies that you might be. I certainly am.) We may not like the monkeys who are currently writing the regulations, but that’s a political matter. American liberalism is based on the assumption that governments can solve social problems; ergo, liberals should in general want government to have such tools as are available to go about their work. That’s why I honestly believe this decision is good for America.