Community and business interests are set in opposition, rather than in a harmonious balance, in the 2005 landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in Kelo v. New London. The narrative of eminent domain, through the lens of Kelo, highlights these conflicting values. The case presents a local government that used its power of takings to attract Pfizer, the pharmaceutical conglomerate, to build a plant for production of the little blue pill, which symbolizes private interests in this case. The community’s dissension of taking an individual’s private property for use by another private entity centered on a pink house, which has come to be known as the symbol of eminent domain abuse. This narrative is explored through in-depth interviews with public administrators experienced with eminent domain, community grassroots organizers involved with the case, and relevant articles from the local newspaper. A key finding of the study surrounds similarities between the perspectives of those people involved in Kelo and administrators throughout the state of Connecticut, the birthplace of the case. Although a nation built on the notion of the right to hold private property, the case suggests that in an era of late capitalism, business is of utmost importance to the community regardless of citizens’ desires in the United States.