Washington Times Article
Apparently King Obama thinks that the role of the supreme court is to rubber stamp everything that Congress passes.
“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 a democratically elected Congress”
A democratically elected congress passed several abortion restrictions too, but I don't hear Obama saying that the Supreme court screwed up the Roe v. Wade decision. And what about Brown v. Board of Education? That case overturned democratically elected state legislative laws. Why is Obama not rushing to defend democracy in that case? Or is it only Federal laws that get a pass from all judicial scrutiny?
“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, there’s a good example, and I’m pretty confident that this court will recognize that and not take that step”
Notice the bold. So Obama gets to decide what is constitutional now? Well why even have a supreme court when we can just let Obama make all of the calls himself!
I feel sorry for the students in Obama's constitutional law class. I don't see how they could have learned anything from someone who so completely misunderstands the roles of the 3 branches of government. It would be like learning economics from Karl Marx.
The U.S. is a nation of laws, not of men, which is why we need each of the branches to check the others. Obama can privately disagree with the case and ultimately the decision all he wants, but to publicly speak out against the supreme court now takes a level of brazenness that is unbecoming of a President and in my opinion appalling.