In case America is still unsure, this is how Barack Obama rolls: If the Supreme Court happens to rule 5-to-4 to uphold a law the president likes, he applauds it and uses the decision as ammo to fire back at critics.
Regardless of whether or not a ruling violates the Constitution, if it serves the progressive goal of curtailing freedom or promoting depravity, such as Roe v. Wade, the president has nothing but respect for the bad decisions made by liberal judges.
On the other hand, if the majority should happen to rule 5-to-4 in favor of something Obama deems threatening to his power, rather than extend a similar deference to the high court’s wisdom, he’ll openly balk and attempt to undermine the concept of separation of powers in the minds of the American people.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) once said that “There were days when judges stayed out of politics. It would be nice to go back to those days.” That is unless of course, men in black robes choose to politicize the law by coming down on the side of liberal policy, in which case judicial involvement is welcome.
Liberal Leahy made his ‘judges stay out of politics’ comments in response to the sort of pick-and-choose hypocrisy that took place in January of 2010 at Barack Obama’s first State of the Union address wherein he scolded the Supreme Court for ruling in favor of removing corporate campaign spending limits.
Obama did something unprecedented during the address while some of the Supremes were seated in the House gallery: Exuding his usual haughty, professorial sternness, he reprimanded the high court for its ruling, saying:
“With all due deference to the separation of powers… [the court]… reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections.”
At the time, Vice President Joe Biden sided with Obama’s crack at disgracing the high court, calling the corporate campaign spending ruling “dead wrong” and saying “we have to correct it.”
Out of curiosity, while preparing to visit Asia in December, did the Vice President happen to take the time to point out that when Barack Obama told Americans that ‘if they like their insurance they can keep their insurance,’ he was “dead wrong?” Or did Mr. Biden bother to insist that, now that Americans are finding out that what the president told them was a boldfaced lie, “we have to correct it?”
Interestingly, neither Obama nor Biden thought right-leaning Chief Justice John Roberts was “dead wrong” when he voted on the side of the liberal judges to deem Obamacare a tax, something the President swore it was not.
Nor did the POTUS nor VPOTUS want to “correct it” when the court’s decision circumvented Article I, Section 7, Clause 1, which states that laws that raise revenue must originate in the House.
Yet, despite the Obama administration’s ongoing duplicity, time has a habit of vindicating the truth. In light of recent revelations, the President is not exactly the bastion of honesty that many originally thought he was, the words mouthed by Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito in response to being openly reproved by a constitutionally-ignorant constitutional law professor carry even more weight than they did three years ago.
The take-away from the 2010 State of the Union address, when the President inappropriately slammed the Supreme Court, was Judge Alito’s facial expression in reaction to what Obama said.
After the president launched his critical remonstration in the direction of the conservative arm of the court, Alito scrunched up his face, shook his head in disapproval, and joined Joe ‘You Lie’ Wilson (R-SC) in pointing out to America that what the president said was “not true.”
Now, three years after the Vice President argued in Obama’s defense that when he scolded the Supreme Court, “The president didn’t question the integrity of the court. He questioned the judgment of it,” the entire country is questioning both the President’s integrity and judgment.
At present, Texas Senator John Cornyn, Republican member of the Judiciary Committee, is trying desperately to take the Obama administration to task for misleading the American public in regards to Obamacare with the claim ‘if you like your plan you can keep your plan.’
Back in 2010, after the controversial SOTU incident, Cornyn argued that Alito must have had an “irresistible impulse” to react to the President’s open criticism of the SCOTUS’s decision. No argument here! When it comes to reacting to the absurd things President Obama says and does, he certainly inspires all manner of “irresistible impulses” in more than a few Americans.
Nonetheless, at the time Cornyn opined:
“I don’t think the president should have done what he did in trying to call out the Supreme Court for doing its job. They are the final word on the meaning of the United States Constitution, even when we don’t like the outcome.”
True! But when Barack Obama rebuked the Supreme Court, what he may have done was unintentionally set a precedent that might come back to bite him on his…on his…never mind.
Following our esteemed leader’s example, Americans who “don’t like the outcome” and are openly critical of the Supreme Court’s Obamacare decision can now say they’re emulating Obama. The president sent the message that it’s just fine to publicly admonish a powerful public official.