I emailed both the President and both Florida Senators for my area - Martinez and Nelson, requesting the senators to vote against the Supreme Court Decision - and expressing my disapproval to the President.

If enough people do this, it may have an effect -according to Michelle Malkin, there is a growing uproar.

Thanks for the email link. I sent mine off.

By what mechanism do you suggest Congress has the ability to overturn a Supreme Court decision by 2/3 majority?

The only possibility is through constitutional amendment which requires 2/3 majority of the House and Senate as well as 3/4 of the states.

You don't say.
Does it go something like proposing the amendment, passing the amendment, and ratifying the amendment?

Will it be OK with you if we start at the beginning?

I let my congressman know, though I think it maybe too late.

Yes, we will have to amend the Constitution to override the decision. It has been done a number of times before. Let's get to it.

A partial copy of my email:
I am writing to you about the Supreme Court's Kelo V New London decision. Five members of the court decided that a clause in the Fifth Amendment meant essentially nothing. I have read the decision, Kennedy's concurrence, O'Connor's dissent and Thomas' dissent, and I agree with the dissenters.

I read legislation and regulations for a living. I can tell you that it seems almost impossible to me for the average homeowner or small business owner to sue over a property taking and win as a result of the decision, even if the plan used to justify the taking will generate no economic benefits. So what now constrains the random exercise of governmental power? After reading the decision carefully, I decided that nothing does.

And nothing, in my opinion, could be more un-American. This is back-door Communism; I did not vote for a member of the Communist party as my representative and I expect the members of the ________ party to reject such a measure by all means that are in their power.

I expect Congress to redress this error, and so do the other members of my community with whom I have spoken. Although much of the discussion in the press has been over local takings and confined to real estate, the truth is that the federal government also has the power to take property, and has used it before, and that this power extends to ANY property, including intellectual property such as patents and copyrights. Therefore any action citizens take on the state level can not affect the potential misuse of this power on the federal level.

The first thing I expect the house to do is to pass a law and send it to the Senate saying that the federal government may not take property for economic benefit.

The second thing I want you to do is to propose an amendment to the constitution defining public use in the context of the takings clause of the Fifth Amendment as being for the use of the public. This amendment should specify that property may not be seized for the purpose of being turned over to private parties or to be used or controlled solely by private parties. It should also stipulate that if property seized under the takings clause is disposed of in this manner, the property reverts to its original owner; the entity which took the property must repay all legal costs to the prior owner; must repay any damages or lost income incurred as a result of the taking; and must forego any taxes for the next ten years after the property owner regains his property. That should solve that problem.

Please do not ignore our messages; this is an issue that will not go away. This is not Cuba and it will never be. The citizens of the United States can amend the Constitution themselves by calling a constitutional convention. If we have to, we will, but we may well take that opportunity to set up a third party that will serve our interests.

Thanks for these links, Donnah. I read the awful news and experienced the shared, awful responses that it seems most of Americans are, at this decision.

But, you've made it easier to start at that beginning from whence everything has to, unless you're a millionaire/billionaire with lobbyists in the employ of various organizations you don't own and don't want to be known to be associated with but who enjoy your dollars.

Not "yours," just saying, expression of speech...

Oh, can I copy and host that "Don't Tread on Me" image of yours?

What credit is necessary? I'd like to use it as you have, to link to the Institute for Justice's website.

Thanks. It's a beautiful graphic, by the way.

Sure, S. Whatever you want to do.