An Ohio Supreme Court decision shows clearly how state constitutions can bar the taking of private property for private projects. A city in Ohio was acting under the theory that improving deteriorating property and creating new development were sufficient grounds for condemnation. From the article: "The decision said that justifying the seizure by claiming that the area is deteriorating was unconstitutional because the term is too vague."
This bodes well for those who fear condemnations under Arkansas's TIF law, which allows private condemnation for private purposes. Vague would be a kind description of the law's definition of blight. Laughable would be better.