Tuesday, April 03, 2012

Since When Is "Judicial Activism" Defined As Upholding The Constitution?

When a corrupt, Chicago pol like Richard Milhous Obama became President.

Yesterday, the Thug in Chief bullied the Supreme Court by warning them that overturning his Obamacare law would be judicial activism (Fox News).

The president spoke at length about the case at a joint press conference with the leaders of Mexico and Canada. The president, adopting what he described as the language of conservatives who fret about judicial activism, questioned how an "unelected group of people" could overturn a law approved by Congress.

"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," Obama said.

The Supreme Court spent three days hearing arguments last week in four separate challenges to the health care law, which stands as the president's signature domestic policy accomplishment. A central challenge was over the individual mandate -- the requirement that Americans buy health insurance. Critics say the mandate is unconstitutional, and that the federal government cannot force people into the insurance marketplace.

Obama on Monday said that without such a mandate, the law would not have a mechanism to ensure those with preexisting conditions get health care.

"I'm confident that this will be upheld because it should be upheld," Obama said, describing the law as "constitutional."

Republican lawmakers slammed the president for his Supreme Court comments. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, accused the president of misrepresenting the implications of a ruling against the law.

"It must be nice living in a fantasy world where every law you like is constitutional and every Supreme Court decision you don't is 'activist,'" he said in a statement. "Many of us have been arguing for nearly three years that the federal government does not have the power to dictate individuals' purchasing decisions. After a national debate on the subject, more than two-thirds of Americans agree that the Obamacare insurance mandate is unconstitutional."

Well, if that's the case, Mr. Obama, why is your InJustice Department suing the states of Arizona, South Carolina, Alabama and Texas, among others, over laws regarding enforcement of immigration and voter ID laws?

Right Scoop has audio from Mark Levin's show, in which he takes apart Obama's phony argument.

No comments: