Results 1 to 10 of 33
#1 Appeals court fires back at Obama's comments on health care case
04-03-2012, 07:01 PM
- Join Date
- Sep 2008
- South Florida
(CBS News) 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.
The order, by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, appears to be in direct response to the president's comments yesterday about the Supreme Court's review of the health care law. Mr. Obama all but threw down the gauntlet with the justices, saying he was "confident" 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."
Overturning a law of course would not be unprecedented -- since the Supreme Court since 1803 has asserted the power to strike down laws it interprets as unconstitutional. The three-judge appellate court appears to be asking the administration to admit that basic premise -- despite the president's remarks that implied the contrary. The panel ordered the Justice Department to submit a three-page, single-spaced letter by noon Thursday addressing whether the Executive Branch believes courts have such power, the lawyer said.
The panel is hearing a separate challenge to the health care law by physician-owned hospitals. The issue arose when a lawyer for the Justice Department began arguing before the judges. Appeals Court Judge Jerry Smith immediately interrupted, asking if DOJ agreed that the judiciary could strike down an unconstitutional law.
The DOJ lawyer, Dana Lydia Kaersvang, answered yes -- and mentioned Marbury v. Madison, the landmark case that firmly established the principle of judicial review more than 200 years ago, according to the lawyer in the courtroom.
Smith then became "very stern," the source said, telling the lawyers arguing the case it was not clear to "many of us" whether the president believes such a right exists. The other two judges on the panel, Emilio Garza and Leslie Southwick--both Republican appointees--remained silent, the source said.
Smith, a Reagan appointee, went on to say that comments from the president and others in the Executive Branch indicate they believe judges don't have the power to review laws and strike those that are unconstitutional, specifically referencing Mr. Obama's comments yesterday about judges being an "unelected group of people."
Obama, how do you like them apples?
04-03-2012, 07:19 PM
Which means that far more educated people than I, also think there is a chance Obama may try to thumb his nose at the Supreme Court.The difference between pigs and people is that when they tell you you're cured it isn't a good thing.
04-03-2012, 08:43 PM
I find this to be hilarious!
I'd love to have been a fly on the wall when Barry was given this news.
Don't you know he was highly insulted that another court dare question him.
Silly justices, don't they know Barry is above the law? NOT!
04-03-2012, 08:48 PM
- Join Date
- Jun 2008
I am seriously concerned about this. I think Barry does have something up his sleeve here.
04-03-2012, 08:49 PM
And this is exactly what our very wise Founding Fathers had in mind when they set up our government with 3 distinct branches to create a system of checks and balances on each other. It is good to see it actually working.
04-03-2012, 08:54 PMThe difference between pigs and people is that when they tell you you're cured it isn't a good thing.
04-03-2012, 08:58 PM
He's already so far out of bounds, as you say because this idiot
worst congress ever has enabled him to go there. I still like to
think and hope that there are still enough real Americans left in
our government and judicial system who will keep the madness
in check till we get him out of office in November.
04-03-2012, 09:00 PM
- Join Date
- Mar 2010
How can one simultaneously maintain that President Obama is an ineffectual idiot and that he's a powerful criminal mastermind?
President Obama has the guaranteed vote of about 95% of 12.6% of the population and 1% of the other 87%. Everything else is in play: unless of course the GOP runs Romney. Then I'd say that Obama is a slam dunk.
04-03-2012, 10:53 PM
I hope this backfires on him big time. Those judges are like gods. When I first started selling office equipment to the feds, I made a terrible mistake. I accidentally parked in a judge's parking spot. It wasn't clearly marked. I observed how upset the underlings got, apologized profusely, moved my car and begged forgiveness for a long time.
Also those judges get whatever they want (as far as office equipment, which is what I saw). Many times they got things way beyond what their usage would justify. Their purchasing clerks made certain that they weren't annoyed or unhappy.
Now the pres calls them "unelected"? Doesn't he comprehend they don't run for election like some low ranking municipal judges? He's challenged them, insulted them, etc. They won't forget. Good luck with some of the other cases he will have coming up.
" To the world you are just one more person, but to a rescued pet, you are the world."
"A Nation of Sheep Breeds a Government of Wolves!"
- Join Date
- Mar 2010
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|