printThe 5th Circuit Court of Appeals is growing testy with Obama, giving the Department of Justice “until Thursday to explain whether the Obama administration believes the courts have the right to strike down a federal law.” Via Glenn Beck’s The Blaze:
A federal appeals court has ordered the Justice Department to clarify comments made by the president when he said yesterday that it would be “unprecedented” for the Supreme Court to overturn his signature health care law (“Obamacare”).
“I am confident that this will be upheld because it should be upheld,” President Obama said.
“Ultimately I am confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress.”
He continued:
And I‘d just remind conservative commentators that for years what we’ve heard is the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint, that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law. Well, this is a good example. And I’m pretty confident that this court will recognize that and not take that step.
It is a good day when activist legislation is struck down. The less legislation on the obese books, the better—unless it is legislation to strike down other overreaching, unconstitutional laws of which we have tens of thousands.
Federalism is forever being “discovered” belatedly and opportunistically by the Demopublicans. Since federalism is a chimera—it no longer exists in any meaningful way—the level of decision-making is immaterial to me. In this context, what matters is the decision to strike down ObamaCare. Who cares which branch of the hydra-headed monster makes it, so long as it is made, and, once made, it holds.
Good tearing apart of the Messiah by Tom Sowell (honorary white racist!):
http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell040412.php3
Obeying the Constitution should be the responsibility of EVERY American – from the voters (who should not vote for politicians who usurp power or demand such usurpations) to the Congress to the President and lastly the Courts. Sadly, the Court is reluctant to go against the other 3 groups (called “judicial activism” a.k.a. obeying the Constitution).
Obama is as full of s##t as Romney – however, fortunately for his re-election, his s##t “smells sweeter” to the average American Booboisie (a Mencken term for “voters”).
The Democrat party has, over the years, filled the various courts with unabashed liberals who time after time have ignored the constitition and ruled politically. Now that there is a chance that his immense power grab, in the form of “Obamacare” might be stricken by the supremes he is low rating the court system. While a tiff between Obama and the federal courts might seem like a pissing contest between two skunks there are probably some honorable, constitution supporting judges out there. Maybe this 5th Circuit judge is one.
Just finished an argument with a Republican. Someone was knocking Ron Paul (again) stated that RP was a… for saying that Lincoln was a bad president. I countered with- Lincoln put six Supremes in jail because they refused to allow him to attack the Confederacy. That gives Obama the right by precedent to put the Supremes in jail if they don’t approve his bill. The host’s answer- “I think Lincoln was right, otherwise we would still be a colony.” Don’t try to make sense of that, I did, almost got a headache. I did decide the country isn’t worth saving. I find that Democrats find all kinds of things in the Constitution, no one else does; Republicans say- “Well it should say it, so we will do it.” I don’t want to see the Republican faces if Obama were to use that precedent.
Zero is a budding Tyrant. [You mean blossoming] A few days ago, in a comment on this site, I predicted he’d ignore the SC if it ruled against his Pet Project. He’s clearly thinking about doing just that. Now I’m hoping he does so. It’ll be another long step toward Civil War.
To RWAC: You might be right. He has ignored the courts before in the case of the Gulf drilling moratorium. If he blows off the Supremes if they find against him who is going to stand against him? The media? Not likely. The Republicans? All noise and smoke but no meaningful action. He just might do it and get away with it.
Obummer has it wrong. In order for the Supremes not to overturn a “law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress,” said law must be Constitutional to begin with.