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.
...One justice in particular chided the administration for what he said was being perceived as a "challenge" to judicial authority -- referring directly to Obama's latest comments about the Supreme Court's review of the health care case.
The testy exchange played out during a hearing over a separate ObamaCare challenge. It marked a new phase in the budding turf war between the executive and judicial branches.
"Does the Department of Justice recognize that federal courts have the authority in appropriate circumstances to strike federal statutes because of one or more constitutional infirmities?" Judge Jerry Smith asked at the hearing.
Justice Department attorney Dana Lydia Kaersvang answered "yes" to that question.
A source inside the courtroom, speaking to Fox News afterward, described the questioning by Smith as pointed. Smith also made clear during that exchange that he was "referring to statements by the president in the past few days to the effect ... that it is somehow inappropriate for what he termed unelected judges to strike acts of Congress. ... That has troubled a number of people who have read it as somehow a challenge to the federal courts or to their authority," Smith said. "And that's not a small matter."
Smith ordered a response from the department within 48 hours. The related letter from the court, obtained by Fox News, instructed the Justice Department to provide an explanation of "no less than three pages, single spaced" by noon on Thursday.
Ace summarizes:
Obama is currently inviting the courts to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act, passed by truly solid democratic majorities, and still popular law. He has instructed his lawyers to not defend the law against challenge (Congress, I believe, has petitioned to intervene to defend the law).
So no, he doesn't really believe the courts can't strike down laws.
He's just lying for political effect, as usual.
HOPE.
PROGRESS.
IN OTHER WORDS: A HUGO CHAVEZ-INSPIRED CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS.
FUBO
ReplyDeleteFUEH
Anyone who knows law knows Marbury v. Madison and the right of Constitutional review. It is taught on Day 1 of Constitutional law. To any lawyer, it is not remotely a question of whether Obama knows this. His Chavezesque outburst was only for the masses. And the 5th Circuits response is the equivalent of a teacher requiring the DOJ to write 50 times "I will not tell untruth's about the Supreme Court's right of Constitutional review." If it goes much further, I would expect the 5th Circuit panel to put the DOJ lawyer in the corner with a dunce cap.
ReplyDeleteKeep it up with the "Yo, Barry" language. You're helping.
ReplyDelete"Yo, Barry"...Priceless.
ReplyDeleteFunny Aside: My Captcha was, ROBLESS and IRATE - appropiate!
"no less than three pages, single spaced"
ReplyDeleteMaybe Obama can write it himself. It'll be the first time in his life he wrote a paper, without the help of Bill Ayers.
Wouldn't be surprised if it goes much further that Obama himself be called before the court and found in contempt. I find him extremely contemptable personally ...
ReplyDelete