Obama scolds U. S. Supreme Court....againRegister Today!
- by tntrn Apr 2, '12It seems that Mr. Obama has completely forgotten that the Supreme Court's job is to rule on laws passed by Congress......even if only by 7 votes, which BTW is not a "strong majority" by any stretch of the imagination.
The Supreme Court has a special role to play in the United States system of government -- the power to check the powers of the President and Congress.
The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.
The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;--to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--between a state and citizens of another state;--between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.
In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.
- Thanks for the history lesson, but what are you talking about?
- Apr 2, '12 by tntrnQuote from TweetyHis speech today where he essentially rebuked the Court ahead of their health care decision because they are "unelected." It was really a new low for him, IMHO>Thanks for the history lesson, but what are you talking about?
- Apr 2, '12 by herring_RN[color=#333333]what the president said in answer to a question:[color=#333333]...ultimately, iím 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. and i'd just remind conservative commentators that for years what weíve 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 iím pretty confident that this court will recognize that and not take that step.
q you say it's not an abstract conversation. do you have contingency plans?
president obama: i'm sorry. as i said, we are confident that this will be over -- that this will be upheld. iím confident that this will be upheld because it should be upheld. and, again, thatís not just my opinion; thatís the opinion of a whole lot of constitutional law professors and academics and judges and lawyers who have examined this law, even if they're not particularly sympathetic to this particular piece of legislation or my presidency.
joint press conference by president obama, president calderon of mexico, and prime minister harper of canada | the white housewhat the media reported:obama warns 'unelected' supreme court against striking down health law
president [color=#183a52]obama, employing his strongest language to date on the supreme court review of the federal health care overhaul, cautioned the court monday against overturning the law -- while repeatedly saying he's "confident" it will be upheld.
- Apr 2, '12 by aknottedyarnWell, selective listening is a skill isn't it?
- Apr 2, '12 by tntrnPerhaps we should do away with the Supreme Court. Why even have the Supreme Court review laws to determine if they are constitutional or not? This court decision won't be making a law....it will determine if a current law will stand or not.
I would think that even the Obama-appointed judges would take offense at his inference.
- Quote from MunoRNWasn't it conservatives that coined the expression "activist judges"?The argument that courts shouldn't "legislate from the bench" has long been a core Conservative principle. I'm not sure why reminding Conservatives of that is considered scolding the court.
- Apr 3, '12 by TweetyPresident Obama is a former president of the Harvard Law Review and famously taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago. But did he somehow not teach the historic case of Marbury v. Madison?That's a fair question after Mr. Obama's astonishing remarks on Monday at the White House when he ruminated for the first time in public on the Supreme Court's recent ObamaCare deliberations. "I'm 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 declared.