Tuesday, April 3, 2012

...an unelected group of people...

That phrase jumped out at me as I read Obama's remarks yesterday:
For years, what we've heard is the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism or the lack of judicial restraint, that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law. And I'm pretty confident that this court will recognize that and not take that step.
That unelected group of people he's referring to is the Supreme Court.  Part of their job, under the Constitution, is to serve as final arbiter of whether the actions of the other two branches of government (the executive branch and the Congress) are “Constitutional” (that is, conforming to the Constitution).  In other words, the Supreme Court's role is to act as a counter-balance to the other two branches, to make sure they don't go too far off the tracks.

Obama, like many progressives, sees that as “meddling” and “undemocratic”.  In their view, if an elected body declares something, that should be the end of it.  Who cares if what they declare isn't allowed under the Constitution?  It's democratic, and that should override everything else.

One wonders what they think the purpose of the Supreme Court is in our government...

Reading things like this, and realizing that it reflects the world-view of a substantial number of my fellow Americans, makes me feel rather hopeless about our future.  Why?  Seriously, folks.  Take a look at our duly-elected Congress.  Tell me that you feel comfortable about the legislation they pass, so democratically.  Do you really want that collection of bozos and perverts telling you how to live your life?

I wonder what's going to happen at the ballot box in November...

2 comments:

  1. My thoughts exactly. I heard this and was telling my wife about it last night and I told her, He can't possibly be that stupid... he must actually KNOW that it is the supreme court's job to make these decisions and that they are unelected for a reason. I'm certain he also knows that such provisions would risk constitutional review. So why would he preemptively call out the supreme court on a decision they haven't made yet? Is he really trying to tear the country apart?

    I'll add that after this Florida shooting, the President, for at least the second time since being elected, has publicly jumped into local issues without facts and in both cases along racial lines when what he should have been doing is urging calm.

    What am I to conclude about this divisive President other than that these are deliberate attempts to undermine the rule of law and perhaps even deliberately prompt civil unrest?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ah, the talking point du jour: Obama wants to bend the Supreme Court to his will and tear the country apart. And that's because... oh, yeah, it's because he made a mild comment about hoping Obamacare would be upheld. We can only hope the republic will endure in the face of such an attack.

    As for the justices being unelected, we haven't heard that from a sitting president say that in years; 5 years, in fact, since GWB said it in 2007. Funny how the right doesn't recognize its own catchphrases when they get recycled.

    ReplyDelete