“Eminent domain” is not a phrase often heard in casual conversation. But within the 17-acre swath of West Harlem that the University plans to transform over the coming decades into a new campus, it is a term loaded with controversy—and a New York State Court of Appeals ruling made Tuesday added a new dimension.

The ruling affirmed the state’s right to take private properties in the Prospect Heights and Park Slope neighborhoods of Brooklyn—in exchange for market-rate compensation for the current owners—and turn them over to developer Bruce Ratner, who wants to build a $4.9 billion complex dubbed “Atlantic Yards.” The seizure process is known as eminent domain—a legal means by which a state can transfer ownership of private properties to another individual or institution who would put the land to more productive public use.

Last December, the state approved the use of eminent domain in Columbia’s Manhattanville expansion zone, which would primarily affect the two property owners there who have refused to sell to the University: Nick Sprayregen, owner of Tuck-It-Away Storage, and Gurnam Singh and Parminder Kaur, owners of two gas stations in the expansion zone. Sprayregen and the Singhs filed separate lawsuits in January—still pending in the Court of Appeals—challenging the approval of eminent domain.

Tuesday’s ruling on Atlantic Yards, while technically separate from the Sprayregen and Singh cases, sets a precedent that threatens their chances of success. The court will be unlikely to go against its own precedent, particularly such a recent one, when it rules on Manhattanville—which is why Columbia administrators have been watching the Atlantic Yards case closely.

From a legal standpoint, it is substantially similar to the Manhattanville issue, with opponents making many of the same arguments to challenge the legitimacy of eminent domain. Opponents of the Manhattanville project claim it does not constitute “public use” as required under eminent domain law, because Columbia is a private institution.

They also dispute the state’s designation of the area as “blighted”—in a condition of economic disrepair beyond the potential for relief by natural market forces—which is another requirement for the invocation of eminent domain. Similarly, opponents of the Atlantic Yards project point to the fact that Ratner is a private developer and question the state’s determination of blight. Columbia officials and Ratner counter that while they are private developers, the projects will provide substantial public benefits.

The Atlantic Yards ruling is likely to pass unnoticed by those who have not been following the issue of eminent domain in New York City, but for those involved in that project and its Columbia counterpart, it is a landmark decision. While the gavel has not yet come down on the Sprayregen and Singh challenges to eminent domain in Manhattanville, those promoting eminent domain and those who would be affected by it likely realize that Tuesday’s ruling, for better or for worse, may put the final nail in the coffin of anti-eminent domain efforts.