I’ve read Little Pink House, and know very well the bastardization of eminent domain for private gain, corruption, and outright theft by government. I abhor it but eminent domain, and eviction, are not the same thing. They may lead to the same outcome, but they are two entirely different processes of government. Perhaps you might find the same read educational.

(1): https://www.amazon.com/Little-Pink-House-Defiance-Courage/dp...

Intended (in the US at least) to be exercised only in the public interest, like to build a dam for flood control or a railroad right-of-way to facilitate commerce.

I fully recognize that "public interest" can be twisted in all sorts of ways, but I agree with the GP comment that taking land from some people to give it directly to other people does not conform to my understanding of the spirit of the eminent domain law.