“…This study has sought to test the assertions made by Justices O'Connor and Thomas about the uneven effects of eminent domain for private-to-private transfers of property (Dreher and Echeverria, 2006) and are consistent with related literature illustrating the disproportionate effects of redevelopment on minorities and the poor (Gans, 1962;Gelfand, 1975;Goetz, 2000;Goodman and Monti, 1999;Gotham, 2001;Hines, 1982;Hirsch, 1983;Kraus, 2004;Massey and Denton, 1993;Wilson, 1996). For contemporary gentrifi cation scholars, these fi ndings may also lend support to a link between redevelopment using eminent domain and recent expanded definitions of 'third-wave' gentrification that include much broader redifferentiations of cultural, social and economic landscapes (Porter and Barber, 2006;Smith, 2002) built around consumptive pursuits such tourism, culture and entertainment in the form of upscale shops, restaurants and housing (Hannigan, 1998;Judd and Fainstein, 1999)-what Zukin (1982, 1991, 1995 and others call 'post-modern cities' (Bassett, 1993;Kearns and Philo, 1993;Reichl, 1999;Scott, 2000;Smith, 1996. To be sure, however, this study's methods were designed to examine eminent domain specifi cally, not gentrifi cation or the relationship between them.…”