Keyword: scotus

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • The Man Who Knew Too Little -Obama's stunning ignorance of constitutional law

    04/03/2012 3:22:03 PM PDT · by Para-Ord.45 · 21 replies
    http://online.wsj.com/ ^ | April 3, 2012 | JAMES TARANTO
    We were half-joking yesterday when we asked if Barack Obama slept through his Harvard Law class on Marbury v. Madison, the 1803 case in which the U.S. Supreme Court first asserted its power to strike down unconstitutional laws. It turns out it's no joke: The president is stunningly ignorant about constitutional law. Obama, " A law like that has not been overturned [pause] at least since Lochner, right? " But in citing Lochner, the president showed himself to be in over his head.
  • Newsweek Calls For Impeaching Supreme Court Justices If Obamacare Overturned

    04/03/2012 8:35:32 PM PDT · by Nachum · 100 replies
    Pat Dollard ^ | 4/3/12 | NewsWeek/DailyBeast
    NewsWeek/DailyBeast – The Roberts Court’s rulings appear to be a concerted effort to send us back to the Gilded Age. If they dump the Affordable Care Act, writes David Dow, we should dump them. You think the idea is laughable? Thomas Jefferson disagreed with you. Jefferson believed Supreme Court justices who undermine the principles of the Constitution ought to be impeached, and that wasn’t just idle talk. During his presidency, Jefferson led the effort to oust Justice Salmon Chase, arguing that Chase was improperly seizing power. The Senate acquitted Chase in 1805, and no Justice has been impeached since, but...
  • Obama’s Lies And Hypocrisy In Demanding Supreme Court Uphold Obamacare

    04/03/2012 10:37:01 PM PDT · by U-238 · 12 replies
    The Conservative Review ^ | 3/02/2012 | MarcusPorcius
    The Anti-President is really so full of hot air it is amazing he doesn’t float away. Obama has in essence preemptively declared the Supreme Court to be an “unelected group of people” who will be guilty of “judicial activism” if they overturn either the individual mandate in Obamacare or the law in totality. He said to do so would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically-elected congress The man is either totally ignorant of history or deliberately lying to the American public as usual. Judicial Activism? What About...
  • Analysis: Obama's Worst Speech Yet

    04/03/2012 7:41:05 PM PDT · by Kaslin · 16 replies
    Townhall.com ^ | April 3, 2012 | Guy Benson
    Today we witnessed something truly remarkable. Barack Obama managed to out-do himself by uncorking what very well may have been the most dishonest, demagogic, and bitterly partisan speech of his presidency. I render that assessment as someone who has sat through and analyzed countless Obama lectures, some of which earned very high marks for deceit and ideological invective. Indeed, today's Occupy-inspired rant takes the cake. It was a depressing and enraging preview of the next seven months, over which this president will unleash a barrage of sophistic and pernicious arguments deliberately designed to sow discord and divide Americans. He will...
  • President Obama, Fair Weather Friend of the Court [Urged Strike Down of Partial-Birth Ban Act]

    04/03/2012 9:19:07 PM PDT · by Steelfish · 1 replies
    The Weekly Standard ^ | April 03,2012 | ADAM J. WHITE
    President Obama, Fair Weather Friend of the Court APR 3, 2012 • BY ADAM J. WHITE Not even a full year into President Obama's first term, Politico observed that he had reached the point of caricature in using the term "unprecedented" to describe basically anything that occurs during his presidency. By now, Americans have learned to shrug off his use of this rhetorical tick. And yesterday it happened again when the president challenged the Supreme Court not to strike down Obamacare's individual mandate, a judicial act that would "be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed...
  • Obama says he will ‘respect’ Supreme Court's ruling on his healthcare law

    04/03/2012 12:43:05 PM PDT · by Nachum · 131 replies
    The Hill ^ | 4/3/12 | Sam Baker
    President Obama softened his rhetoric Tuesday about the possibility of a Supreme Court decision striking down his healthcare reform law, after Republicans accused him of “threatening” the high court. (Snip) Obama said Tuesday that he would respect the court’s opinion, but still believes the justices should not overturn the healthcare law. “The point I was making is that the Supreme Court is the final say on our Constitution, and all of us have to respect it,” he said. “But it’s precisely because of that extraordinary power that the court has traditionally exercised significant restraint and deference to a duly elected
  • The Imperial President: Obama Wages War on SCOTUS, Congress

    04/03/2012 7:37:04 PM PDT · by Nachum · 20 replies
    Big Government ^ | 4/3/12 | Ben Shapiro
    President Obama’s favorite word, as we’ve learned repeatedly, is “I.” He uses it on a constant basis. He uses it to claim credit and to assign blame. He uses it to cajole and to threaten. He uses it to plead and to prod. But he doesn’t use the word “I” purely out of ego. He does it because for President Obama, “I” represents the executive branch. And the executive branch, in Obama’s view, is the ruling branch of American government. President Obama’s latest attack on the Supreme Court is just the latest evidence of his deep-rooted
  • To Save ObamaCare, Obama Does Full Court Press

    04/03/2012 7:20:22 PM PDT · by Oldeconomybuyer · 4 replies
    Investors Business Daily ^ | April 3, 2012 | Editorial
    Checks And Balances: A president with no respect for the Constitution warns of judicial activism by a Supreme Court reviewing his landmark legislation's constitutionality. It would be unconstitutional to let it stand. Someone will have to remind President Obama the Supreme Court is a co-equal branch of government, part of a system of checks and balances designed to rein in precisely the kind of runaway government exhibited by his administration. Our community-organizer-in-chief has a different opinion. "Ultimately, I am confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was...
  • Obama botches legal precedent in citing Supreme Court

    04/03/2012 6:14:41 PM PDT · by Oldeconomybuyer · 29 replies
    Los Angeles Times ^ | April 3, 2012 | by David Savage
    President Obama said again Tuesday that it has been a long time since the Supreme Court struck down an economic law passed by Congress, but he mixed up the decisions and their timing. “We have not seen a court overturn a law that was passed by Congress on an economic issue, like healthcare, that I think most people would clearly consider commerce,” the president said. “A law like this has not been overturned at least since Lochner. Right? So we’re going back to the ‘30s, pre-New Deal.” Actually, that’s wrong. The case of Lochner vs. New York was decided in...
  • Justice Kennedy's Million Dollar Question: Can you create commerce in order to regulate it?

    04/03/2012 4:55:35 PM PDT · by BCrago66 · 10 replies
    Hoover Institution ^ | 4/3/12 | Richard Epstein
    The entire landscape of Congress’s constitutional powers changed on March 27, 2012, when, very early in the argument over the individual mandate, Justice Anthony Kennedy asked a somewhat shaken Solicitor General Donald Verrilli this simple question: “Can you create commerce in order to regulate it?” I was as surprised by that opening gambit as everyone else. But surely not as dismayed. As three full days of oral arguments confirmed, that one question turned the constitutional showdown over Obamacare into a real horse race, with a five to four vote to strike the mandate down perhaps now the most likely outcome....
  • Judges order Justice Department to clarify following Obama remarks on health law case

    04/03/2012 3:26:28 PM PDT · by tobyhill · 88 replies
    Fox News ^ | 4/3/2012 | fox news
    A federal appeals court is striking back after President Obama cautioned the Supreme Court against overturning the health care overhaul and warned that such an act would be "unprecedented." A three-judge panel for the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday ordered the Justice Department to explain by Thursday whether the administration believes judges have the power to strike down a federal law.
  • What Happened to the Independent Judiciary?

    04/03/2012 1:44:29 PM PDT · by Kaslin · 9 replies
    Rush Limbaugh.com ^ | April 4, 2012 | Rush Limbaugh
    BEGIN TRANSCRIPT RUSH: Look at the way we're talking today. I have just one question: Whatever happened to the independent judiciary, which is what we are supposed to have. We are supposed to have an independent judiciary, separation of powers and all that. Look at the way we're discussing it, and we're only discussing it by virtue of reacting to the attempt by the president of the United States to influence the outcome, blatantly so. It's a violation of decorum, ethics, any number of things. Tradition. But here's the thing. This is what we know. If the Supreme Court strikes...
  • Political Word Games (Sowell: Obama is simply lying)

    04/03/2012 3:47:21 PM PDT · by jazusamo · 47 replies
    Creators Syndicate ^ | April 3, 2012 | Thomas Sowell
    One of the highly developed talents of President Barack Obama is the ability to say things that are demonstrably false, and make them sound not only plausible but inspiring. That talent was displayed just this week when he was asked whether he thought the Supreme Court would uphold ObamaCare as constitutional or strike it down as unconstitutional. He replied: "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." But how unprecedented would it actually be if...
  • Appeals court fires back at Obama's comments on health care case

    04/03/2012 3:31:24 PM PDT · by Brandybux · 21 replies
    CBS News ^ | April 3, 2012 | Jan Crawford
    In the escalating battle between the administration and the judiciary, a federal appeals court apparently is calling the president's bluff -- ordering the Justice Department to answer by Thursday whether the Obama Administration believes that the courts have the right to strike down a federal law, according to a lawyer who was in the courtroom.
  • Obama Asks ‘Unelected’ Supreme Court Not To Take Extraordinary Step Of Overturning Health Care Law

    04/03/2012 10:48:26 AM PDT · by Ernest_at_the_Beach · 35 replies
    mediaite.com ^ | | 6:05 pm, April 2nd, 2012 | Noah Rothman
    In a Rose Garden press conference on Monday alongside the Mexican President Felipe Calderon and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, President Barack Obama reminded the Supreme Court justices that they have a responsibility to show “judicial restraint” while considering the constitutionality of the president’s signature health care reform law. RELATED: Senate Democrats Warn Overturning Health Care ‘Grave For Nation,’ Good For Democratic Electoral Hopes“I think the American people understand, and I think the justices should understand that in the absence of an individual mandate, you cannot have a mechanism to insure that people with pre-existing conditions can actually get health...
  • Appeals court fires back at Obama's comments on health care case

    04/03/2012 2:10:13 PM PDT · by mwilli20 · 146 replies
    CBSNews ^ | April 3, 2012 3:42 PM | Jan Crawford
    ... a federal appeals court apparently is calling the president's bluff -- ordering the Justice Department to answer by Thursday whether the Obama Administration believes that the courts have the right to strike down a federal law ...
  • Obama Fact, Fiction & Human Nature

    04/03/2012 2:10:02 PM PDT · by agee · 3 replies
    Founding Ideals ^ | 04/03/2012 | Aaron Gee & Steve Graff
    President Obama often takes full advantage of the bully pulpit to excoriate political opponents or to register his displeasure with decisions that didn't go his way. The naked attempt to pressure the Supreme Court in his remarks during the recent joint press conference continues the pattern. The President's remarks were at times dishonest. More surprising is that the Presidents speech shows just how shallow his knowledge of the Constitution and human nature really is.  Dishonest Statement:"Ultimately, 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...
  • Obama Fact, Fiction & Human Nature

    04/03/2012 2:10:02 PM PDT · by agee
    Founding Ideals ^ | 04/03/2012 | Aaron Gee & Steve Graff
    President Obama often takes full advantage of the bully pulpit to excoriate political opponents or to register his displeasure with decisions that didn't go his way. The naked attempt to pressure the Supreme Court in his remarks during the recent joint press conference continues the pattern. The President's remarks were at times dishonest. More surprising is that the Presidents speech shows just how shallow his knowledge of the Constitution and human nature really is.  Dishonest Statement:"Ultimately, 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...
  • I'm getting a bad feeling about all of this.

    04/03/2012 1:44:05 PM PDT · by servo1969 · 107 replies
    If there's one thing that Obama is a master at it's lying. With that in mind I'm starting to feel really apprehensive about the SCOTUS vote on Obamacare. I hate to say it but what if he's won? What if he's managed to flip one of the judges (or didn't even have to)? What if he's been informed by Kagan or Sotomayor that it's in the bag? What if all these little statements to the press are just him loading the bases for a grand slam in June? So he can look Large and In Charge to all his minions?...
  • Obama’s ‘gotcha’ moment reveals his ignorance of the law

    04/03/2012 1:10:37 PM PDT · by 2ndDivisionVet · 27 replies
    Hot Air ^ | April 3, 2012 | Howard Portnoy
    In his comments in the Rose Garden on Monday about the fate of his signature health care legislation, the president attempted at one point to hoist Republicans by their own petard. He said: "I’d just remind conservative commentators that for years what we’ve 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…." He is right that conservatives have repeatedly lambasted liberal judges for their judicial activism. He is dead wrong, however, when...
  • Judge Napolitano Slams Obama’s SCOTUS Criticism: ‘No Pres. Has Questioned This Since Andrew Jackson!

    04/03/2012 10:16:32 AM PDT · by Nachum · 40 replies
    Pat Dollard ^ | 4/3/12 | Mediaite
    Video at link
  • Barack Obama already knows Supreme Court decision on ObamaCare

    04/03/2012 10:13:44 AM PDT · by Oldpuppymax · 30 replies
    Coach is Right ^ | 4/3/2012 | Doug Book
    If the Supreme Court has followed long standing tradition, the preliminary decision as to the Constitutionality of the ObamaCare individual mandate and perhaps the fate of the law itself was known to the Justices on Friday of last week. After oral arguments it is common practice for the Justices to meet Friday morning in a conference room where each Justice votes on the case, beginning with the Chief Justice and proceeding according to seniority. Shortly thereafter Justices will be assigned the writing of majority and minority opinions and comment on various case issues. Decisions can change over the months until...
  • Obama’s unprecedented definition of ‘unprecedented’

    04/03/2012 8:38:09 AM PDT · by JustSayNoToNannies · 21 replies
    The Atlanta Journal-Constitution ^ | April 2, 2012 | Kyle Wingfield
    “I am confident 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.” That was President Obama earlier today, talking about the legal challenge to Obamacare the court heard last week — and demonstrating once again he doesn’t have a very firm grasp on the meaning of “unprecedented.” After all, the Supreme Court has been overturning laws — which necessarily have been passed by a majority of a democratically elected Congress — since 1803’s Marbury v. Madison decision. By this count...
  • Obama Accused of Trying to 'Intimidate' Supreme Court by Texas Congressman

    04/03/2012 9:49:09 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 20 replies
    MyFox Boston ^ | 04/03/2012
    WASHINGTON -- Texas Republican congressman Lamar Smith on Monday suggested that President Barack Obama's remarks about health care at a Rose Garden press conference came close to intimidation of the Supreme Court. "I am very disappointed by our President," Smith told FOX News Radio. "That comes very close to trying to intimidate the Supreme Court of the United States and I'm not sure that's appropriate," he added. Earlier in the day at a press conference with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe Calderon, Obama was asked about the consequences of the court ruling that his health care...
  • Obama’s unsettling attack on the Supreme Court

    04/03/2012 9:45:38 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 25 replies
    Washington Post ^ | 04/03/2012 | Ruth Marcus
    There was something rather unsettling in President Obama’s preemptive strike on the Supreme Court at Monday’s news conference. “I’d just remind conservative commentators that for years what we’ve heard is the biggest problem on the bench is judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint — that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law,” Obama said. “Well, here’s a good example. And I’m pretty confident that this court will recognize that, and not take that step.” To be clear, I believe the individual mandate is both good policy and sound law, well within...
  • Reactions of Liberals to the Obamacare Oral Arguments

    04/03/2012 7:48:38 AM PDT · by Kaslin · 12 replies
    Townhall.com ^ | April 3, 2012 | Edward White
    Heading into the oral arguments in the ObamaCare case last week, it seemed that Liberals thought the case was in the bag. Their attitude was, as Nancy Pelosi once stated, when brushing off a question about whether the individual mandate is constitutional, “Are you serious? Are you serious?” Things apparently did not turn out as Liberals had expected at the oral arguments. Almost immediately after the oral arguments had concluded, Liberals began expressing their shock that the Supreme Court might actually invalidate all or part of ObamaCare. It was as if the thought had never crossed their minds. The initial...
  • ObamaCare Gives Federal Government Too Much Power

    04/03/2012 8:18:13 AM PDT · by forty_years · 2 replies
    The University Daily Kansan ^ | 4/3/12 | Billy McCroy
    Starting on March 26th, the Supreme Court listened to three days of arguments concerning the constitutionality of the healthcare act that has come to be known as “Obamacare.” Their ruling, which won’t come until the end of June, will shape the future of American healthcare. While the healthcare issue has been off the front pages since it was signed in March of 2010, the constituently of one of its more controversial requirements has been in and out of the federal court system. The ruling addresses an issue at the heart of how our nation is governed. The Constitution gives a...
  • Dems wage pressure campaign on Supreme Court over health ruling

    04/03/2012 2:14:46 AM PDT · by Libloather · 49 replies
    The Hill ^ | 4/02/12 | Alexander Bolton
    Dems wage pressure campaign on Supreme Court over health rulingBy Alexander Bolton - 04/02/12 06:02 PM ET Democrats have waged a not-so-subtle pressure campaign on the Supreme Court in recent days by warning a ruling against the healthcare reform law would smash precedent and threaten popular social programs. President Obama was the latest to weigh in when he declared Monday that a wide array of legal experts would be astonished if the court struck down part or all of his signature domestic initiative. “I’m confident the Supreme Court will uphold the law,” Obama said Monday during a Rose Garden press...
  • Crestfallen Liberals Failed to Take Constitution Seriously

    04/03/2012 7:34:45 AM PDT · by Kaslin · 36 replies
    Townhall.com ^ | April 3, 2012 | Charlotte Hays
    Conservatives should not be lulled into a false sense of security by the questions asked during the Supreme Court’s oral arguments over the Affordable Care Act. But we can savor the shock and horror spreading through the ranks of the bill’s supporters, can’t we? Let’s start of the immortal words of the famously filter-less former Speaker Nancy Pelosi when asked if the Congress had the constitutional authority to change our government and the way we live our lives in one fell swoop known as the individual mandate. She replied with a taunting "Are you serious? Are you serious?" But...
  • Obama Slams Supreme Court over Obamacare

    04/03/2012 7:18:38 AM PDT · by IbJensen · 44 replies
    Heritage Foundation ^ | 4/3/2012 | Mike Brownfield
    The highest elected official in the United States dished out an extra helping of irony yesterday when, in speaking at a joint news conference with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe Calderon, President Barack Obama slammed the Supreme Court as an “unelected group of people” who will have turned to “judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint” if they strike down Obamacare. The President’s remarks imply that the Court, were it to rule the individual mandate unconstitutional, would be acting recklessly in undertaking judicial review of Congress’ unprecedented use of the Commerce Clause to force Americans...
  • An Open Letter to President Barack H. Obama, Constitutional Scholar [Excellent]

    04/03/2012 6:39:48 AM PDT · by upchuck · 27 replies
    America's Right ^ | April 2, 2012 | Jeff Schreiber
    Dear Mr. President, Supposedly, you are some sort of constitutional scholar. At the very least, you can read, you can write, and despite being merely some sort of guest lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, you once famously referred to yourself as a “Constitutional Law professor.”Ringing a bell so far, Mr. President? Great.While my Juris Doctor is from the Rutgers School of Law in Camden, New Jersey, and while Rutgers-Camden is hardly Harvard Law School, within the first three days of Constitutional Law class those who did not already know of and understand perhaps the single most important...
  • The President Runs Against the Supremes

    04/03/2012 7:10:06 AM PDT · by servo1969 · 16 replies
    RushLimbaugh.com ^ | 4/2/2012 | Rush Limbaugh
    BEGIN TRANSCRIPT RUSH: Here's Barack Obama. He got a question this afternoon. After last week's arguments at the Supreme Court, many experts believe there could be a majority five-member vote to strike down the individual mandate. If that were to happen, if it were to be ruled unconstitutional, what would you do? Would you still guarantee health care to the uninsured and those Americans who would become insured as a result of the law? OBAMA: Ultimately 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...
  • Did the Supreme Court’s initial ObamaCare vote leak to Obama?

    04/03/2012 6:38:06 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 26 replies
    Hotair ^ | 04/03/2012 | AllahPundit
    Unless he's trying to goose a slow news day with speculation, I have no idea why Drudge is pushing the "leak" angle. There's nothing about it in the Reuters story he links to and, as far as I saw, nothing in O's comments today in the Rose Garden to suggest he had inside info. If he had seized on some obscure part of last week's arguments, like the Anti-Injunction Act, then that might have been a clue that something the media had overlooked was weighing heavily inside the Court's own deliberations and that O had gotten wind of it. But...
  • Obama takes a shot at Supreme Court over healthcare (Obama's trying to intimidate the SCOTUS)

    04/02/2012 2:41:10 PM PDT · by tobyhill · 100 replies
    reuters ^ | 4/2/2012 | Jeff Mason
    President Barack Obama took an opening shot at conservative justices on the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday, warning that a rejection of his sweeping healthcare law would be an act of "judicial activism" that Republicans say they abhor. Obama, a Democrat, had not commented publicly on the Supreme Court's deliberations since it heard arguments for and against the healthcare law last week. Known as the "Affordable Care Act" or "Obamacare," the measure to expand health insurance for millions of Americans is considered Obama's signature domestic policy achievement. A rejection by the court would be a big blow to Obama going...
  • Nice Court You Have There, It Would Be A Shame If Something Happened To It

    04/03/2012 3:39:33 AM PDT · by servo1969 · 75 replies
    PJmedia.com ^ | 3/29/2012 | Richard Fernandez
    The Talking Points Memo headline reads: “Dems Warn Of ‘Grave Damage’ To SCOTUS If ‘Obamacare’ Is Struck Down.” Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D), a former attorney general of Connecticut, pointed out that the U.S. Supreme Court would damage itself if it did something so ridiculous as find Obamacare unconstitutional: "The court commands no armies, it has no money; it depends for its power on its credibility. The only reason people obey it is because it has that credibility. And the court risks grave damage if it strikes down a statute of this magnitude and importance, and stretches so dramatically and drastically...
  • Ex Parte Obama

    04/03/2012 2:27:22 AM PDT · by BCrago66 · 17 replies
    New York Sun ^ | 4/2/12 | New York Sun
    It’s been a long time since we’ve heard a presidential demarche as outrageous as President Obama’s warning to the Supreme Court not to overturn Obamacare. The president made the remarks at a press conference with the leaders of Mexico and Canada. It was an attack on the court’s standing and even its integrity in a backhanded way that is typically Obamanian. For starters the president expressed confidence that the Court would “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.” Reuters’ account noted that...
  • Lobbying justices, Obama makes his health law case

    04/02/2012 5:16:43 PM PDT · by Oldeconomybuyer · 17 replies
    AP via Google News ^ | April 2, 2012 | By BEN FELLER, AP White House Correspondent
    WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama on Monday issued a rare, direct challenge to the Supreme Court to uphold his historic health care overhaul, weighing in with a vigorous political appeal for judicial restraint. He warned that overturning the law would hurt millions of Americans and amount to overreach by the "unelected" court. Obama predicted that a majority of justices would uphold the law when the ruling is announced in June. But the president, himself a former law professor, seemed intent on swaying uncertain views in the meantime. "Ultimately, I'm confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would...
  • Obama issues stern language on Supreme Court health care decision (Sit down Napoleon!)

    04/02/2012 1:49:33 PM PDT · by AngelesCrestHighway · 44 replies
    Yahoo News ^ | 04/02/2012 | Rachel Rose Hartman
    President Obama on Monday issued stern language to the Supreme Court of the United States regarding his health care law, expressing confidence "Obamacare" will not be overturned by the nation's highest court. "I'm confident this will be upheld because it should be upheld," the president said Monday afternoon at a White House press conference that included ‪Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe Calderon, who are attending the North American Leaders' Summit. The president said overturning the law would be "an unprecedented and extraordinary step" and compared the court's rejection of the law to "judicial activism."
  • E.J. Dionne: The right’s stealthy coup (Already making excuses for ObamaCare overturn?)

    04/02/2012 2:31:40 PM PDT · by 2ndDivisionVet · 51 replies
    The Washington Post ^ | April 2, 2012 | E.J. Dionne Jr.
    Right before our eyes, American conservatism is becoming something very different from what it once was. Yet this transformation is happening by stealth because moderates are too afraid to acknowledge what all their senses tell them. Last weekÂ’s Supreme Court oral arguments on health care were the most dramatic example of how radical tea partyism has displaced mainstream conservative thinking. ItÂ’s not just that the lawÂ’s individual mandate was, until very recently, a conservative idea. Even conservative legal analysts were insisting it was impossible to imagine the court declaring the health-care mandate unconstitutional, given its past decisions. So imagine the...
  • Obama warns 'unelected' Supreme Court against striking down health law

    04/02/2012 12:46:07 PM PDT · by Deo volente · 318 replies
    FoxNews.com ^ | April 2, 2012
    President 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.
  • Why Obama Shouldn’t Declare War on the Supreme Court

    04/02/2012 1:53:59 PM PDT · by QT3.14 · 30 replies
    Time ^ | April 2, 2012 | Joe Meacham
    [SNIP}......But here is a pretty good rule of thumb for Democratic Presidents: if it didn’t work for Franklin D. Roosevelt, who won four terms and a World War, it probably won’t work for you either.
  • Rigorous strip searches in US jails upheld by Supreme Court

    04/02/2012 1:08:50 PM PDT · by katiedidit1 · 46 replies
    Yahoo.com ^ | 4/2/2012 | anon
    The Supreme Court upheld Monday the power of jails across the United States to carry out invasive strip searches on all incoming detainees, including those suspected of minor offenses. In a 5-4 ruling, it threw out an innocent New Jersey businessman's claim that his constitutional rights were violated when jailers showered him with delousing agent and lifted his genitals during his week behind bars.
  • The Obamacare Mandate is Unprecedented

    04/02/2012 12:17:56 PM PDT · by servo1969 · 9 replies
    RushLimbaugh.com ^ | 4/2/2012 | Rush Limbaugh
    BEGIN TRANSCRIPT RUSH: There are a number of stories today on the individual mandate that the court's deciding, "Hey, that isn't any big deal. Do you know how many mandates there already are out there?" And one of the mandates that's already out there that's being cited by the media -- these stories, by the way, are designed to put pressure on and influence the justices of the court, not you. The media has now focused its attention on health care, the Supreme Court, on the justices, and one of the mandates that they are citing is the requirement that...
  • Steven Pearlstein of Washington Post: Eat your broccoli, Justice Scalia

    04/02/2012 11:28:06 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 12 replies
    Washington (Com)Post ^ | 03/31/2012 | Steve Pearlstein
    If the law is an ass, as Mr. Bumble declares in “Oliver Twist,” then constitutional law must surely be the entire wagon train. Like most Washington policy wonks, I spent too much of last week reading transcripts of the Supreme Court arguments over the constitutionality of the new health reform law. This was to be a “teaching moment” for the country, an opportunity to see the best and the brightest engage in a reasoned debate on the limits of federal power. Instead, what we got too often was political posturing, Jesuitical hair-splitting and absurd hypotheticals. My first thought on perusing...
  • Rep. James Clyburn: Obama should campaign against the Supremes if they strike Obamacare

    04/02/2012 8:33:32 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 21 replies
    Hotair ^ | 04/02/2012 | Tina Korbe
    Last week, liberals were blindsided by the Supreme Court's thoughtful and serious consideration of the constitutional objections to Obamacare --- and conservatives were taught to hope as they've never hoped before that the Supremes might toss the entirety of the monstrosity.Immediately, though, conservative Eeyores warned that the elimination of Obamacare might work to Barack Obama’s advantage in the general election because he would no longer have to defend the overwhelmingly unpopular law. While I never skewed to that view, I offer to conservative pessimists this hopeful thought: Maybe Barack Obama would be just stupid enough to take the advice of...
  • Obama needs a Supreme Court win on health care

    04/02/2012 6:21:56 AM PDT · by Oldeconomybuyer · 23 replies
    Washington Post ^ | April 2, 2012 | By Ed Rogers
    ...President Obama needs distractions from the economy. But if health care goes down in defeat, Obama will have to defensively explain himself, or, worse, explain what he plans to do next. Obama doesn't do defeat very well, and part of his explanation would have to include admitting serious past mistakes. Otherwise, voters might rightly think he would try to reload the unpopular program, only tweaked in anticipation of court review. Remember, this was never a popular bill, and the methods used to pass it were a cynic's delight. A defeat of Obamacare will offer further proof that after three years,...
  • Supreme Court health care debate: If the law fails, what's next? (Big enviro & labor next?)

    04/01/2012 11:11:09 AM PDT · by Libloather · 22 replies
    Politico ^ | 4/01/12 | JOSH GERSTEIN
    Supreme Court health care debate: If the law fails, what's next?By JOSH GERSTEIN | 4/1/12 7:01 AM EDT The Supreme Court has yet to rule on President Barack Obama’s health care law, but court watchers already are handicapping the domino effect if it falls. If the justices knock out key parts of the law or bring down the whole thing, the reverberations could be felt across the legal landscape for generations to come, radically reining in the scope of federal power, according to supporters of the law and others who closely track the high court. And if the justices decide...
  • Capitol Follies

    04/01/2012 11:35:39 AM PDT · by jazusamo · 8 replies
    American Thinker ^ | April 1, 2012 | Clarice Feldman
    Scientists announced this week that they had found ten billion habitable planets in the Milky Way. The announcement was cheering, raising the possibility that there was some intelligent life somewhere in the universe in a week where it was clear there was hardly any in the Capitol. I'm talking about the three day argument before the Supreme Court on the 2,700 page wonk wet dream, ObamaCare. As you recall a Democrat Congress rammed this legislation down our throats on Christmas Eve led by Nancy Pelosi (soi-disant Catholic Theologian and Constitutional Scholar, San Francisco), aided by some high kicking and legerdemain...
  • Justice Sonia Sotomayor's Shocking Ignorance

    04/01/2012 10:24:34 AM PDT · by Clintonfatigued · 86 replies
    The American Thinker ^ | March 31, 2012 | Jason Lee
    The liberal Supreme Court justices have demonstrated profound and shocking ignorance of the American health care system. Here's one of the most jarring examples: "What percentage of the American people who took their son or daughter to an emergency room and that child was turned away because the parent didn't have insurance," asked Sotomayor, "... do you think there's a large percentage of the American population that would stand for the death of that child -- (who) had an allergic reaction and a simple shot would have saved the child?" I have a precise answer for Justice Sonia Sotomayor. The...
  • Retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor: Still Judging After All of These Years

    03/31/2012 7:14:45 PM PDT · by BCrago66 · 22 replies
    Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ^ | 3/23/12 | Justice Sandra Day O'Connor
    I confess that I respect Justice O'Conner as a person, not so much her jurisprudence (e.g. her pro-abortion stance, and her totality-of circumstances test which gives too much discretion to government.) I like her personal story & work ethic. I know this post of limited appeal, but some might be interested to know that she's been riding the various federal circuit courts for several years now, joining appellate panels across the country. I haven't done a comprehensive study, but I know that includes the 9th, 6th & 4th circuits. All retired justices can do this, but it's optional, e.g., it...