The Supreme Court has made a decision that severely weakens property rights by stating that government moratoriums on development of privately-owned property do not count as "takings" andtherefore that the owners do not need to be compensated. This is a severe blow to property rights as it allows the government to exercise considerable power over private property without giving the owner any compensation. This case means that the government can stall development on a parcel of land for whatever reason, and the owner of that parcel need not be compensated by the government even though they have essentially deprived him of his ownership rights.
The majority opinion contains this gem:
Land-use regulations are ubiquitous and most of them impact property values in some tangential way often in completely unanticipated ways. Treating them all as per se takings would transform government regulation into a luxury few governments could afford.
No, it would mean that the government would need to more carefully consider the rights of property owners in making decisions. The case in consideration isn’t just a zoning issue, it was a case in which the government prevented development for six years, a period which is completely unreasonable. This decision could allow governments to create moratoria on development that could be extended for years – effectively creating a taking under the Takings Clause This decision is a blow to one of the very cornerstones of democracy – the right of ownership.