Loose rhetoric doesn’t help your argument; there is hardly a “hostile invasion” going on. What you think is excessive is irrelevant; what the Supreme Court thinks is excessive is very relevant, and something like your “plan” - complete forfeiture of all property rights - is excessive, period.
Once upon a time, the Supreme Court thought Dred Scott was private property.
More recently, that property could be confiscated from one citizen and gifted to another to enhance tax revenues.
This does not inspire great confidence in the relevance of Supreme Court opinions.
Period.