In Norwood v. Horney, 110 Ohio St. 3d 353, 2006 Ohio 3799, 853 N.E.2d 1115, at P88, the Supreme Court of Ohio held that the void-for-vagueness doctrine applies to eminent-domain laws. When a legislative action is challenged as unconstitutionally vague, a court must determine whether the enactment: (1) provides sufficient notice of its proscriptions to permit compliance by a person of ordinary intelligence and; (2) is specific enough to prevent official arbitrariness or discrimination in its enforcement. Id. at P84. Because the right to possess and preserve property is fundamental, courts must apply "the heightened standard of review employed for a statute or regulation that implicates a First Amendment or other fundamental constitutional right." Id. at 88.