Judge pissed off by Obama's comments on health care law

[koshergrl]

Law. We're talking about a law. Overturning a law. Not "overturning regulations"..the LAW is what is under scrutiny.

I'm sorry you're stupid and dishonest. It has to cause problems in your life.

And what does the law, Law, LAW contain? Regulations. Which might be what Obama was referring to.

So chill out. Grab some decaf. let me read this court case (you might want to as well) and then we pick back up with you insulting me.

Oh so now we're back to "Obama is too stupid to know what he was saying" defense.



Anyway, striking down an unconstitutional law is not unprecedented.

 

[koshergrl]

"It is not unprecedented at all for the Supreme Court to declare a law unconstitutional; they do that on a regular basis, so it's not unprecedented at all," Smith said. "What is unprecedented is for the president of the United States trying to intimidate the Supreme Court." "

GOP lawmaker warns Obama against-

 

[koshergrl]

"President Obama's spokesman reiterated that a Supreme Court ruling against Obamacare would be "unprecedented," but even when explaining why that claim should stand, he fumbled Supreme Court history.

"It would be unprecedented in the modern era of the Supreme Court, since the New Deal era, for the Supreme Court to overturn legislation passed by Congress designed to regulate and deal with a matter of national economic importance like our health care system," White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said today. "It has under the Commerce Clause deferred to Congress's authority in matters of national economic importance." Carney also said that Obama does not regret making the comment.
"But Carney's history is incorrect. "Jay, that's not true," CBS's Norah O'Donnell countered. "There are two instances in the past 80 years where the president -- where the Supreme Court has overturned [laws passed on the basis of the Commerce Clause]: US vs Lopez and US vs Morrison."

Again! WH warns of 'unprecedented' SCOTUS ruling

 

[DontBeStupid]

Adair v. United States, 208 U.S. 161 (1908)

The SCOTUS struck down a provision of the 1898 Erdman Act which would have prohibited railroads from requiring workers to agree not to join a labor union. (The Court addressed what "commerce" even meant.)

EDIT: The Court (in apparent response to FDR's heavy handed Court packing scheme) later reversed itself on the Adair case.

Bailey v. Drexel Furniture, 1922

The SCOTUS voided the 1919 federal law that levied a big ass tax on products produced by child labor.
It was a cool decision that you would be well to review since it addresses the NECESSITY of voiding Unconstitutional legislation and cites yet other cases (including at least one other alleged "commerce cause" -based Act):

It is the high duty and function of this court in cases regularly brought to its bar to decline to recognize or enforce seeming laws of Congress, dealing with subjects not intrusted to Congress, but left or committed by the supreme law of the land to the control of the states. We cannot avoid the duty, even though it require us to refuse to give effect to legislation designed to promote the highest good. The good sought in unconstitutional legislation is an insidious feature, because it leads citizens and legislators of good purpose to promote it, without thought of the serious breach it will make in the ark of our covenant, or the harm which will come from breaking down recognized standards. In the maintenance of local self-government, on the one hand, and the national power, on the other, our country has been able to endure and prosper for near a century and a half.

Id. Words to remember.

Then of course, in Retirement Board v. Alton Railroad Co., striking down yet another Act allegedly premised on the Commerce Clause authority, the SCOTUS also voided the Railroad Retirement Act. RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD v. ALTON R. CO., 295 U.S. 330 (1935).

So much for "unprecedented."

I haven't read the other cases you provided, but I will. I did read A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States and, yup, looks pretty cut and dry to me the SCOTUS overturning regulations as unconstitutional. Interesting the media didn't bring that case up as it seems to directly apply to the recent hearings on the Affordable Care Act. But anyway ...

Yeah, I'm at a loss as to what Obama was referring to then when he used the word "unprecedented". The rest of his comments are fine though, but the use of that word is odd.

 

[SniperFire]

People are growing tired of Barry's tinhat dictator act.

 

[koshergrl]

They're not odd.

He was lying, and threatening the court.

Once you quit making excuses for him it makes sense.

 

[DontBeStupid]

They're not odd.

He was lying, and threatening the court.

Once you quit making excuses for him it makes sense.

1) I don't see how you can claim he was lying, as you would need to know what he was thinking at the time. That's why I was asking about cases specific to regulations, on the chance that's what he was referring to.

2) He was in NO way threatening the Court! Ha! That's laughable! Show me this "threatening" language!

 

[Liability]

They're not odd.

He was lying, and threatening the court.

Once you quit making excuses for him it makes sense.

1) I don't see how you can claim he was lying, as you would need to know what he was thinking at the time. That's why I was asking about cases specific to regulations, on the chance that's what he was referring to.

2) He was in NO way threatening the Court! Ha! That's laughable! Show me this "threatening" language!

FDR wasn't threatening either ...

 

[The T]

They're not odd.

He was lying, and threatening the court.

Once you quit making excuses for him it makes sense.

1) I don't see how you can claim he was lying, as you would need to know what he was thinking at the time. That's why I was asking about cases specific to regulations, on the chance that's what he was referring to.

2) He was in NO way threatening the Court! Ha! That's laughable! Show me this "threatening" language!

FDR wasn't threatening either ...

No hints...

 

[koshergrl]

No, I don't need to know what he was thinking at the time to state he was lying.

He was lying when he said striking down the law would be unprecedented. That was a lie. Which is why he is NOW quantifying it by saying "Oh that's not what I meant, what I REALLY meant was..."

bullshit. This is what Obama and Obamites always do. They say initially exactly what they mean...and when they get caught in a lie, they say they really "meant" something else.

It's just lying.

He was also lying when he said a significant majority voted that crap law in. It wasn't a significant majority. His own side voted against it. It squeaked.

 

[Liability]

No, I don't know to know what he was thinking at the time to state he was lying.

He was lying when he said striking down the law would be unprecedented. That was a lie. Which is why he is NOW quantifying it by saying "Oh that's not what I meant, what I REALLY meant was..."

bullshit. This is what Obama and Obamites always do. They say initially exactly what they mean...and when they get caught in a lie, they say they really "meant" something else.

It's just lying.

He was also lying when he said a significant majority voted that crap law in. It wasn't a significant majority. His own side voted against it. It squeaked.

He was indeed lying since he absolutely had learned enough of that "law" jazz to profess to be a teacher of Constitutional Law. And your typical 1L (not even just those in Harvard) knows of the Sick Chicken case.

Accordingly, unless he has developed Alzheimer's Disease, the President knew that the Court has indeed invalidated previous Congressional Acts on Constitutional grounds involving the commerce clause. And he knows that any prior such case means THIS possible invalidation of ObamaCare would NOT be lacking in precedent.

Accordingly, it was a damn lie.

 

[bodecea]

Judge upset by Obama's comments on health care law | Political Headlines | Comcast

HOUSTON — A federal appeals court judge on Tuesday seemed to take offense to comments President Barack Obama made earlier this week in which he warned that if the Supreme Court overturned his signature health care overhaul it would amount to overreach by an "unelected" court.

The Supreme Court is set to issue a ruling later this year on whether to strike down some or all of the historic health care law.

During oral arguments in Houston in a separate challenge to another aspect of the federal health care law, U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Jerry Smith said Obama's comments troubled a number of people who have read them as a challenge to the authority of federal courts.

Obama the Surpreme ruler has spoken-

Or in other words ...

"How dare the President freely voice his opinion."

Apparently.

 

[DontBeStupid]

They're not odd.

He was lying, and threatening the court.

Once you quit making excuses for him it makes sense.

1) I don't see how you can claim he was lying, as you would need to know what he was thinking at the time. That's why I was asking about cases specific to regulations, on the chance that's what he was referring to.

2) He was in NO way threatening the Court! Ha! That's laughable! Show me this "threatening" language!

FDR wasn't threatening either ...

FDR's actions were threatening. Obama has done nothing threatening and said nothing threatening.

 

[koshergrl]

No, how dare he lie.

I don't give a shit about his opinion. Who cares about the opinion of a liar? He wasn't giving it as an opinion, he was stating it as fact, and it was a lie.

But people like you like that, bod. He's your kinda guy.

 

[koshergrl]

1) I don't see how you can claim he was lying, as you would need to know what he was thinking at the time. That's why I was asking about cases specific to regulations, on the chance that's what he was referring to.

2) He was in NO way threatening the Court! Ha! That's laughable! Show me this "threatening" language!

FDR wasn't threatening either ...

FDR's actions were threatening. Obama has done nothing threatening and said nothing threatening.

The court didn't view it that way.

And apparently he knows it, or he wouldn't be backtracking like crazy now....

 

[Liability]

1) I don't see how you can claim he was lying, as you would need to know what he was thinking at the time. That's why I was asking about cases specific to regulations, on the chance that's what he was referring to.

2) He was in NO way threatening the Court! Ha! That's laughable! Show me this "threatening" language!

FDR wasn't threatening either ...

FDR's actions were threatening. Obama has done nothing threatening and said nothing threatening.

Yes, FDR's attempted actions were threatening and designed to be seen as threatening.

And people have seen enough of the Asshole in chief to realize that when he pontificates like the moron he is, with his Chicago style roots, he is laying the foundation for future threats, too.

And face it. It's not like he and the DNC and the Soros crew couldn't orchestrate a media "discussion" in all earnest seriousness about the prospect for (and justification for) a new version of packing the Courts. You can almost hear Stephanopoulos smirking his way through a talking head show, now, with the usual suspects.

 

[Rozman]

This judge was pissed....
Obama has got some splainnin to do....

 

[DontBeStupid]

No, how dare he lie.

I don't give a shit about his opinion. Who cares about the opinion of a liar? He wasn't giving it as an opinion, he was stating it as fact, and it was a lie.

But people like you like that, bod. He's your kinda guy.

I love that you keep calling him a liar, even though you have no proof.

 

[gallantwarrior]

No, how dare he lie.

I don't give a shit about his opinion. Who cares about the opinion of a liar? He wasn't giving it as an opinion, he was stating it as fact, and it was a lie.

But people like you like that, bod. He's your kinda guy.

Hell, if you hadn't noticed, Bodecea would bear Barry's children, inseminated the natural way (no turkey basters when the donor is the messiah!)

 

[Si modo]

No, how dare he lie.

I don't give a shit about his opinion. Who cares about the opinion of a liar? He wasn't giving it as an opinion, he was stating it as fact, and it was a lie.

But people like you like that, bod. He's your kinda guy.

I love that you keep calling him a liar, even though you have no proof.

OK.

Here are some facts:

Obama said this is unprecedented - challenging a law in the SCOTUS.

There is case law, thus it is not unprecedented.

Obama claims that he was a constitutional law expert.

Obama claims that he taught constitutional law.



Can we agree on that?

Now, either he lied when he said it was unprecedented, or he was a shit professor and a shit constitutional law expert. Or, do you have some other explanation?

(this should be good)