According to America’s top Constitutional Law Professor turned President of the United States, the Supreme Court should not overturn “a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected congress.”
What about the people, acting through the democratic process, to amend their own constitution?
I ask because in California, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled it unconstitutional for the people of California to amend their constitution to prohibit gay marriage. Most damning, the Ninth Circuit’s opinion pretty clearly says that when judges act and the people choose to amend their constitution in response, such an amendment is unconstitutional.
Will anyone in the media ask the President if, based on his logic about the Supreme Court, he supports the voters in California who sought to pass Proposition 8?
“No, no,” he might try to retreat. “I’m talking about when the Supreme Court tries to rein in rights.”
Well then, does the President believe government funded health care is a right?
Likewise, does the President support the legislatures of the several states enacting Voter ID laws through a democratically elected legislature?
But wait . . . there are more questions the media should ask the President if we’re going to hold everyone accountable for their words and not just Republicans.
Does the President believe the Supreme Court should overturn Roe v. Wade as the law declared unconstitutional a law passed by a strong majority in a democratically elected state legislature?
Hey, what about the immigration laws in Arizona and Alabama?
“I said ‘Congress’,” the President might reply.
Okay. Well in 2003 the United States Congress passed the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 by a larger margin that the previous Congress passed Obamacare and that majority was bipartisan.
Does the President now believe the Supreme Court was correct to uphold the constitutionality of “a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected congress”? If so, does the President now retract his statement from 2007 where he attacked the Supreme Court for upholding “a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected congress”?This illustrates just how shaky is the foundation of Obama's claim. On what shaky ground Obamacare lies. And if the Supreme Court really can be intimidated by the other branches of government, how shaky and shifting the ground the country is left to stand on without firm adherence to the Constitution. If you have yet misunderstood the aims of the Obama administration against the Constitution of this great nation, it is time to be convinced. These are unprecedented times indeed.
Other conservatives have things to say on this same topic. Check any conservative site and you'll find this discussed in detail and with appropriate alarm.
Here for Rush Limbaugh's take on why Obama attacks the High Court.
Here for Breitbart's "Imperialist President" on Obama's unconstitutional power grabs and how he wants to illegally take more power should he win reelection.