Is Lockdown Without Compensation Unconstitutional?

Lockdown without compensation  violates the spirit if  not the letter of the Fifth Amendment provision: "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

The lockdown may not involve government  permanently taking possession of property as is usually the case, but the action deprives the owner of the right  to use the property  to  generate
income which  in effect  is the. same situation.   States have been compensating  owners  of property commandeered for use  to treat COVID-19 patients.  States   should be compensating  owners  of lockdown  property.             

Firefighters may  construct a  firebreak to  stop a major wildfire.   They will burn  off a strip of vegetation  ahead of the  fire so the  fire will stop when it reaches the break.

The states have been using closed businesses as "virus breaks" because the  virus cannot  move through   empty  spaces.   By taking  private property for public use as "virus breaks" states are obligated to compensate the property owners.  

States probably won't compensate the property owners  unless  property owners can use class action lawsuits to  get the courts to order compensation.   Alternatively property owners might ask President Donald Trump to require   states  to first  use any new virus assistance to compensate the property owners.