Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Flouting the rule of law
NY Post ^ | February 25, 2011 | Editorial

Posted on 02/25/2011 2:53:22 AM PST by Scanian

Just what is it about the rule of law that President Obama doesn't get?

The Justice Department announced Wednesday that it now believes the federal Defense of Marriage Act -- which defines marriage as being a legal union between one man and one woman -- is unconstitutional, and said it will no longer defend the law in court.

So, just like that, Obama & Co. effectively declare null a law duly passed by Congress, signed by a previous president -- and presumptively binding on the government until either the courts or Congress declare otherwise.

It's a breathtaking act of arrogance, a precedent so fraught that it threatens one of the nation's bedrock founding principles: That America was to be ruled by law, not by individuals.

Presidents have found particular laws vexatious for as long as there have been presidents.

Still, when Franklin Roosevelt decided he didn't like legislation forced on him by Congress, he had sufficient respect for the law itself to attempt to pack the Supreme Court with friendly justices.

He lost.

He should have.

And it's not as if Obama, et al., don't understand the basic issue: Last October, the administration got it right in similar circumstances.

While disagreeing with the "Don't ask, don't tell" law blocking gays from serving openly in the military -- and despite objections from his left-wing base -- the president declared that he was obliged to follow and defend the law.

He added that he wanted DADT repealed by Congress rather than by the courts -- which is exactly what happened two months later.

But now this.

(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: arrogance; defenseofmarriage; justicedept; obama

1 posted on 02/25/2011 2:53:26 AM PST by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Scanian
One step closer to tyranny. Obama declares that he is the law.
2 posted on 02/25/2011 3:01:39 AM PST by Truth29
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scanian
This is not an act of arrogance as this shitty paper commentator states.

THIS IS IMPEACHABLE OFFENCE!

It is not the first time. You Americans act on this or loose the grips of the Law on your country.

Add this to Wis. Senate Stall, to Drilling Moratorium, to Czars ruling and much more and you will see the result!

3 posted on 02/25/2011 3:04:17 AM PST by Mayr Fortuna
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

Stop funding these people

Stop listening to these people

Just go around them and fix the problems, ignoring the whinings of those on the left hellbent on destroying the country

If we don’t... There won’t be a country left (which is their goal, of course)


4 posted on 02/25/2011 3:07:20 AM PST by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

No problem...the next R President will refuse to prosecute Roe v. Wade, habeus corpus, and collective bargaining. Game Over.


5 posted on 02/25/2011 3:18:09 AM PST by ez ("Abashed the devil stood and felt how awful goodness is." - Milton, Paradise Lost)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mayr Fortuna

Well, you seem pretty upset about it. Too bad I haven’t heard many in DC who feel that way.

In fact, NOBODY.


6 posted on 02/25/2011 3:42:54 AM PST by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ez

“...the next R President will refuse to prosecute Roe v. Wade, habeus corpus, and collective bargaining.”

How we wish.


7 posted on 02/25/2011 3:46:11 AM PST by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

bump


8 posted on 02/25/2011 3:46:24 AM PST by lowbridge (Rep. Dingell: "Its taken a long time.....to control the people.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

It’s a breathtaking act of arrogance, a precedent so fraught that it threatens one of the nation’s bedrock founding principles: That America was to be ruled by law, not by individuals


They wanted an African American President——they got one.

Arrogance???? LMAO George and Wheezy have it in abundance.


9 posted on 02/25/2011 3:48:17 AM PST by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scanian
It's a breathtaking act of arrogance, a precedent so fraught that it threatens one of the nation's bedrock founding principles: That America was to be ruled by law, not by individuals.

I have worked as a Spanish translator for years and have seen the rise and fall of many Latin American governments. One of the first things the new leftist dictators of these countries (Ecuador, Bolivia, Venezuela, etc.) do is take on the court, particularly the constitutional court, and either dissolve it and throw its members in jail or simply ignore it. And they do exactly the same thing with validly passed laws: they just ignore them and say, "So, what are you gonna do about it, huh?"

I see this as a real challenge to the Supreme Court. Obama criticized them openly last year and now he is just shrugging and saying, ok, the law is what I say it is, and I don't need no stinkin' Constitution or court telling me what to do.

10 posted on 02/25/2011 3:52:18 AM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: livius

“So, what are you gonna do about it, huh?”

Isn’t that basically what Andrew Jackson was quoted as saying about John Marshall re. Indian relocation?

The “Father of the Democratic Party.” They have always been the scum that they still are.


11 posted on 02/25/2011 3:57:45 AM PST by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Truth29
One step closer to tyranny. Obama declares that he is the law.

----------------------------

Correctamundo !!!

We'll just have to sit in the back while he makes Rat policy by hijacking the democratic process.

Constitution and the Devil-3sm

I say we impeach this jackass.

It might fail as in BJ Clinton's second term impeachment but it's one thing America needs to set it straight again.

12 posted on 02/25/2011 4:26:41 AM PST by BobP (The piss-stream media - Never to be watched again in my house)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Truth29

Yup. The Executive Branch can now just pick and choose what laws it wants to enforce and defend. No problem there [/s]


13 posted on 02/25/2011 4:27:44 AM PST by rbg81
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

Mark


14 posted on 02/25/2011 4:28:39 AM PST by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mayr Fortuna
THIS IS IMPEACHABLE OFFENCE!

Oh but we keep hearing from people right here that impeachment is off the table due to previous experiences with one William Jefferson Clinton.
15 posted on 02/25/2011 4:39:27 AM PST by SpaceBar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

I disagree strongly with the President’s decision to not defend the law, but I’m afraid I agree with his basic position. The law is unconstitutional.

DOMA attempts to override, or provide exceptions for, a specific provision of the Constitution by means of a law passed by Congress and signed by the President.

While I very much agree with what DOMA is trying to accomplish, the proper way to do it is via a constitutional amendment. Which, unfortunately, will never happen.

It sets a horrible precedent. Do Congress and the President have equal authority to override provisions of the 1st or 2nd Amendments?


16 posted on 02/25/2011 4:39:50 AM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

Obama is the law, and Obama is above the law, therefore there is no law.

Impeachment is becoming necessary. The big obstacle is the Senate.


17 posted on 02/25/2011 4:44:42 AM PST by Fred Hayek (All Hail the No Talent Pop Star pResident.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SpaceBar

The question is what is the point of impeachment.

If it’s to make a political point, then the GOP can impeach if they stick together in the House.

If it’s to remove Obama from office, ain’t gonna happen. If the GOP were to all vote for removal in the Senate, they’d still be close to 20 votes short. And as we all know, a good number of GOP senators would defect.

So you would in all likelihood wind up with a better than 2/3 majority against conviction. Which quite possibly would strengthen the President, not weaken him.

How does going thru this charade help the country? Why not spend the political capital impeachment would consume on defeating his reelection campaign?


18 posted on 02/25/2011 4:45:24 AM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Fred Hayek
Impeachment is becoming necessary. The big obstacle is the Senate.

True, but a little like saying, "Levitation is becoming necessary. The big obstacle is the Law of Gravity."

19 posted on 02/25/2011 4:48:13 AM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Venturer

Now don’t go pickin on George Jefferson. He might have had an attitude, but he ran a real business. Employed people. Barry Dunham was a community organizer. What did he produce?


20 posted on 02/25/2011 4:49:31 AM PST by Fred Hayek (All Hail the No Talent Pop Star pResident.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Fred Hayek

-——What did he produce?——

World chaos


21 posted on 02/25/2011 4:51:13 AM PST by bert (K.E. N.P. N.C. D.E. +12 ....( History is a process, not an event ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

But common-sense judges can still say the law is in effect, and must be obeyed, ruling against homosexual-marriage plaintiffs.

Wouldn’t that tick off Obama & Holder.


22 posted on 02/25/2011 5:12:16 AM PST by canuck_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

Jackson definitely had similar ideas, and a similarly autocratic approach (to everything).


23 posted on 02/25/2011 5:28:17 AM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Fred Hayek

What did he produce?

Chaos.


24 posted on 02/25/2011 5:53:32 AM PST by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: livius
In his “vetting” before the election by the tragically sycophantic press, Obama was marketed to the masses as a Constitutional scholar. A label which the left has used with glee. He is using whatever expertise he has to dismantle the Constitution as an explosives expert renders a bomb useless. "I hope he fails."
25 posted on 02/25/2011 5:55:15 AM PST by stayathomemom (Beware of kittens modifying your posts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

States need to ignore king obuma. They can start by refusing to implement obuma deathcare and any other illegal decree.


26 posted on 02/25/2011 6:05:09 AM PST by sergeantdave (The democrat party is a seditious organization and must be outlawed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

With this latest atrocity of a decision, Obama proves once and for all that he is a hypocritical, totally politically motivated, power-seeking Hugo Chavez wannabe.


27 posted on 02/25/2011 7:24:43 AM PST by driftless2 (For long-term happiness, learn how to play the accordion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

I think I’ve figured out who Obama thinks he is. Andrew Jackson.


28 posted on 02/25/2011 7:47:32 AM PST by Old Student
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Student

And that was without reading my comment #11!

And reply #23


29 posted on 02/25/2011 10:43:34 AM PST by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson