[Noachian]

This stands the Fifth Amendment's takings clause on its head.

Just what kind of remedy do the people have when the Supreme Court makes an unconstitutional ruling?

Who overrules the judiciary?

[clee1]

Guns overrule the judiciary, and any other tyranny for that matter.

Time for the Second American Revolution.

[MagnoliaB]

I found this article:

http://www.prospect.org/print/V12/15/friedman-l.html

"One of the myths of our political system is that the Supreme Court has the last word on the scope and meaning of federal law. But time and time again, Congress has shown its dissatisfaction with Supreme Court interpretations of laws it passes--by amending or re-enacting the legislation to clarify its original intent and overrule a contrary Court construction.

The Supreme Court often insists that Congress cannot really "overrule" its decisions on what a law means: The justices' interpretation has to be correct since the Constitution gives final say to the highest court in the land. But Congress certainly has the power to pass a new or revised law that "changes" or "reverses" the meaning or scope of the law as interpreted by the Court, and the legislative history of the new law usually states that it was intended to "overrule" a specific Court decision."

Sounds like the best thing would be for everyone to raise hell with their congressman and representatives about this. If enough people show their anger over this decision perhaps they will do something. I plan on contacting mine.

[doberville]

EXCELLENT question.

What sort of recourse do we have to overturn this monstrocity?

Perhaps at last the inert bottoms of our countrymen will vacate their sofas in self interest.

[oldbrowser]

OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE

That should have been :

OF THE INDIVIDUAL, BY THE INDIVIDUAL, FOR THE INDIVIDUAL

As long as politicians can claim that they are doing things for the common good then they own all of us.