Update IV: Holy gunfight at the OK Corral Batman! To quote Justice Elena Kagan “WOW”. Double WOW. Fifth Circuit calls out DOJ lawyer: Is your boss now claiming that courts don’t have the power to strike down laws?
We couldn’t believe it when we first heard it. The Obamascam story gets better every day. After DOJ this Thursday answers the 5th Circuit the Supreme Court will be able to use the document in the eventual decision issued.
——————————————————————————————Update III: Why don’t they call it what it is – Thuggery? A bunch of outlets picked up on what we wrote yesterday.
Elected officials are speaking up against the thuggery. GOP lawmakers: Obama is “threatening” and “intimidating” the Supreme Court
The respected establishment newspaper The Hill wrote it was a “pressure campaign” by Dems to intimidate the Supreme Court.
At Obama lovin’ Politico the JournoListers are forced to admit that “Obama, the left take on Supreme Court“. Examples abound on what Politico describes, “Obama’s statement echoes an emerging line of attack on the left.”
Charles Lane of the Washington Post weighed in with an intelligent post discussing “limiting principles.” Lane draws an intriguing line from the health care debate to the Supreme Court’s discussions/ruling on the Bush “War On Terror”:
“Just as the Bush administration insisted that the war on terror was a new and unique kind of war, the Obama administration assures the court that the health-care market is unlike any other.
And now a conservative-led majority on the court may strike down Obama’s individual mandate, just as a liberal-led majority struck down Bush’s military tribunals. If so, law professor Orin Kerr wrote on the Volokh Conspiracy blog, “this will be the second consecutive presidency in which the Supreme Court imposed significant limits on the primary agenda of the sitting President in ways that were unexpected based on precedents at the time the President acted.”
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy was in the majority when the court reined in Bush, and his questions at oral argument last week suggested that he has misgivings about the scope of the health-care-reform law, too.”
George W. Bush was derided a “cowboy” but we don’t recall an attack by Bush (on a national security matter) against the court.
“The thing is, those judges may not be elected, and may not have any divisions.
But they have one thing, long memories:
The other thing they have is class, so they will not allow those memories to get in the way of their decision. And they will not be bullied by the bully pulpit.”
Update: Others are taking note of Obama thuggery today. The thuggery is not unprecedented. Obama: I sure hope the Supreme Court doesn’t do something unprecedented by striking down ObamaCare:
“The “strong majority” in Congress went 219-212 in the House, with 34 Democrats defecting. Not a single Republican in either chamber voted for it, and as Ace notes, the public itself has been steadfastly opposed to the law since day one. Against that backdrop, it’s an amazing show of balls by The One to dress this up as the Court somehow thwarting the people’s will. But even if O-Care really did have a “strong majority,” so what? The whole point of judicial review is to make sure that congressional majorities, strong or not, remain bound by their enumerated powers and the Bill of Rights. You know what law really did have a “strong majority” in both chambers? DOMA. Think there’ll be any tears shed on the left for majoritarianism if Anthony Kennedy cashiers that one on a 5-4 vote?”
If the Supreme Court strikes down the Obama health law scam opponents should headline in every article written (you know we will) that the Supreme Court acted in defense and wishes of the American people. Also, it might be wise for the Supreme Court in the majority opinion to forthrightly address the smears and attacks that will be used by Barack Obama henchmen and Barack Obama himself to undermine the constitutional standing of the court.
We recently wrote that Barack Obama will attempt to intimidate the Supreme Court and particularly Chief Justice Roberts. Today at a press conference Barack Obama performed his thug act against the Supreme Court.
Barack Obama was doing what we predicted he would do. Barack Obama did what his henchmen want him to do. For instance, Rep. James Clyburn: Obama should campaign against the Supremes if they strike Obamacare.
Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.) said President Obama should campaign against the Supreme Court, painting it as a conservative, activist institution if it rules that the administration’s healthcare law is unconstitutional.
“In terms of the Congress, I believe that it would be off-base for us to do that, but for the president, I don’t think it is,” Clyburn said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” on Monday. “I think the president ought to take a look at what happened in years before — we’ve seen presidents run against Congress and we’ve seen presidents run against the Supreme Court. Franklin Roosevelt did it to the Supreme Court; [Harry] Truman did it to the Congress.”
James Clyburn was the Obama supporter tasked with calling Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton “racist”. Clyburn is a cheap thug disguised as a congressman. He doesn’t wear a hoodie but his specialty is drive-by shootings. Today Obama picked up Clyburn’s gun:
“We are confident that this will be upheld because it should be upheld,” Obama said at a joint news conference with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe Calderon.
“The reason is because in accordance with precedent out there, it’s constitutional,” Obama said. “That’s not just my opinion, by the way. That’s the opinion of legal experts across the ideological spectrum, including two very conservative appellate court justices who said this wasn’t even a close case.” [snip]
Overturning the law would be “an unprecedented, extraordinary step” since it was passed by a majority of members in the House and Senate. “I just remind conservative commentators that for years we’ve heard that the biggest problem is judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint. That a 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.”
That cheap suit law lecturer (not professor) Barack Obama must have forgotten Marbury v. Madison as he attacks the court for striking down a law passed “by a majority of members in the House and Senate.” That’s a role of the court – to strike down laws passed by a congress and signed by a president – if it is unconstitutional. That’s what the Supreme Court did in Roe v. Wade and Lawrence v. Texas – strike down a whole bunch of laws (and in Lawrence abandoned stare decisis by striking down Bowers v. Hardwick) that had been on the books for many years after having been passed by legislators.
Cheap suit law lecturer Barack Obama also did not mention that the “majority” which he speaks of was a singularly partisan majority. As to all those “legal experts” and what they thought before oral argument last week, if Barack Obama relied on those “legal experts” it is a case of the blind leading the blind.
Barack Obama is worried the Supreme Court will listen to the American people and strike down the Obama health scam. That is why Barack Obama today attacked the Supreme Court.
He wasn’t wearing a hoodie but Barack Obama today acted like a thug robbing a 7/11. It’s the Chicago way.