Skip to comments.ABA President’s Statement on President Obama’s Remarks on Judicial Review
Posted on 04/08/2012 12:34:51 PM PDT by Lacey
I have noticed a tendency of some commentators (such as Larry Tribe) to discount the gross inaccuracy of President Obamas remarks on Monday concerning judicial review, by pointing to the substantially revised views he expressed on Tuesday. On the NewsHour, my colleague and friend Mike Seidman went so far as to insist that the Presidents statement on Monday was entirely correct. To the contrary, I take the Presidents Tuesday statement, along with his felt need to make it, as an implicit admission that his Monday statement was wrong and in need of prompt correction.
I am therefore pleased to see that the President of the American Bar Association reads these two statements the same way I do, and does not attempt to throw the Presidents statement on Monday down a memory hole. But Mr. Robinson goes farther to also imply that a decision invalidating the Affordable Care Act would not necessarily serve as a good example of judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint. He appears to be reacting to and rejecting the obvious ongoing effort by supporters of the ACA or the President (or both) to politicize any adverse ruling by the Court in advance of reading its legal basis. But his focus is on the President as an elected official and leader, rather than on these commentators.
STATEMENT OF WM. T. (BILL) ROBINSON III, PRESIDENT, AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION
Re: President Obamas remarks on upcoming U.S. Supreme Court ruling on national health care
President Barack Obamas remarks on Monday speculating about the Supreme Courts potential decision in the health care legislation appeal are troubling. Particularly worrisome was his suggestion that the courts decision in this case could serve as a good example of what some commentators have cited as judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint by an unelected group of people.
Were gratified that the president recast his remarks Tuesday. He clarified appropriately that the Supreme Court is the final say on our Constitution and our laws, and all of us have to respect it.
Federal judges are, by design, not elected officials. Article II of our Constitution reserves for the president the authority to appoint Supreme Court justices and all other officers of the United States with the advice and consent of the Senate. In fact, President Obama himself has offered more than 123 nominations for Article III judgeships, including two lifetime appointments to our nations highest court.
The legitimacy of judicial review was settled more than 200 years ago in the landmark case Marbury v. Madison, which established such review as a key safeguard of the separation of powers doctrine. The Framers of our Constitution clearly understood that an independent judiciary is critical to the maintenance of our democracy and freedom.
It is incumbent on all of our elected officialsincluding those aspiring to hold officeto continually demonstrate that the courtroom is not a political arena. It is a measure of a free society that individuals are able to openly disagree with court decisions, but we should expect our leaders to refrain from partisan statements aimed at judges fulfilling their constitutional role and responsibilities.
They are pushing back because Obamalini is trying to muscle-in on the elite lawyers’ turf.
Ubama will make them an offer they can't refuse.
Looks like several of us were posting ABA stuff at the same time.
The only reason I can think of for this atypical statement is that if Obama is right . . . they will all be out of work.
Obama reached his intended uneducated audience with his lies and they undoubtedly believed him. Mission accomplished from Obama’s standpoint. The subsequent chatter won’t matter.
Obamacare barely passed...along party lines. The marriage act passed by a HUGE majority...something like 80-20 in the Senate.
All Obama is doing is showing us how he's going to play the loss....blame the Republicans.
“the courtroom is not a political arena”
Yes. And no.
There's a small chance that he's insulted them one time too many and even his "safe" justices are pissed off enough to vote in favor of the constitution.
“I think I’m shocked that the American Bar Association isn’t rallying around Obama on this.”
Agreed. Their position is usually mushmouthed but immovably left of center. Perhaps they fear erosion of their power? What good are lawyers in a lawless society?
Coulda knocked me over with a feather when I saw the ABA president’s comments. That is one left leaning outfit, but like a broken clock ...
In the legal biz, there's something known as "black robe disease" that afflicts judges who get too full of themselves.
The U.S. Supreme Court is the vector for Black Robe Disease. You can hardly help being full of yourself there (Justice Thomas the few times I have seen him seems to be immune though), and the liberals are the worst offenders because they have a tenuous grasp on reality in the first place. She-Who-Should-Have-Recused and the Wise Latina haven't been there long enough to get over being appointed by OZero, and they'll be in his corner. But for the rest of them, especially on top of the attack at the State of the Union address, this could be the last straw.
I also wonder how many justices are speculating about whether Obama's sudden outburst was caused by Kagan leaking the result of the preliminary banc meeting vote, and just how irritated they are by a potential breach of the court's sacred confidentiality. They take it very seriously -- when Woodward wrote The Brethren, reputedly aided by a couple of former law clerks dishing all kinds of inside stories, there was an explosion you could hear across the Potomac.
I'd love to see them overturn ObamaCare purely on Constitutional principles, but if p*$$ing off a few swing votes gets it done, I'll take that.
He left them no choice. FDR at least did not denounce the court before their decisions. Obamas comments are unprecedented, except by Lincolns actions taken to remand civilians to military courts. It bothers me that Obama thinks this occasion to be equally grave. Does were think that we are in a state of nature?
Bump so I can read and learnM
You are welcome!