Here’s President Obama’s SCOTUS attack walk back attempt:
“Well, first of all, let me be very specific. Um, [pause] we have not seen a court overturn [pause] a [pause] law that was passed [pause] by Congress on [pause] a [pause] economic issue, like health care, that I think most people would clearly consider commerce. A law like that has not been overturned [pause] at least since Lochner, right? So we’re going back to the ‘30s, pre-New Deal.”
Let’s fact check the president.
The Lochner (1905) case involved state law. It was called Lochner vs New York because it involved a conviction of a bake shop owner under a state labor law.
The Bakeshop Act was a New York state labor law which prohibited bakery employees from working for more than sixty hours per week or ten hours per day. Lochner permitted an employee to work in his bakery for more than sixty hours in one week and was convicted of his second offense and fined. Lochner appealed his conviction on the grounds that the law violated his freedom to contract under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
How that case applies to the federal ObamaCare mandate, the US Congress and the Commerce Clause is…well, anyone’s guess. It doesn’t.
The president also said it would be “unprecedented” to overturn a law based on the Commerce Clause because the courts haven’t done that since before the New Deal. Much of the New Deal itself was found unconstitutional by the Supreme Court; that’s why FDR tried to expand the court and then pack it with his cronies. But the president isn’t correct that the courts have not thrown out a law based on finding limits to the Commerce Clause since before the New Deal. In United States vs Lopez, the Supreme Court ruled that Congress’ powers under the Commerce Clause are limited. That ruling came down in 1995, the same year that Barack Obama launched his political career.
Some terribly unfair criticism of the President suggests that he does not understand the role of the Supreme Court in determining the Constitutionality of legislation or the meaning of words such as “unprecedented”. Clearly we need to see his college transcripts to remind EVERYBODY that he is the Smartest Man Ever Elected President.
– give him a calendar.
Good idea, CraigZ! Bring on the transcripts! Other unfair criticism of the President suggests that he does not understand the separation of powers doctrine. He must believe that if he gives legislation passed by a “strong majority of a democratically elected Congress” his signature, then it’s golden – no one can successfully challenge it. Legislation is presumptively constitutional, and then with his signature, it becomes ironclad, right?
Yes, Mr. President that’s right, it’s ironclad . . . . . except for the itsy-bitsy point of what those pesky ‘ol unelected SCOTUS justices might say about it.
Mr. President, perhaps you should be aware of two significant things, which I hereby offer to you at no charge:
1. Congress frequently and routinely exceeds its authority by passing unconstitutional laws; and,
2. Think about toning down your rhetoric on what the SCOTUS should do and shouldn’t do. My guess is you’ve already inflamed at least some of them with what you’ve previously said – just remember the old saying that when you’re in a hold, you should stop digging.
No, he knows exactly what it means, which is why he used it to give a false impression. ‘Unprecedented’ has a negative connotation. The Left collects all such negative words as weapons for political combat. They know exactly what the words mean. In order to lie effectively, you MUST know what words mean.
People keep thinking these guys are stupid. They are not. They know exactly what they are doing. From the view of morality and decency and fair play, you think they are just being stupid.
Well, yes, if you were one of us and saying something like this, it would be stupid, but they are the Other. They are not of us. In their world, there is no such thing as morality and decency and fair play. There is only victory and power, by whatever means necessary. Not stupid, ruthless!
Well, “unprecedented” goes so nicely with “unintellected.”
The President is now in “the consequences will never be the same” territory. He is so rattled and flustered he is making statements in public that make no sense.
Shorter version of Barack Obama’s Monday message to the Supreme Court:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sd2S7JTTkY&feature=youtube_gdata_player
It’s amusing to listen to liberals de-legitimize the Constitution. Do they not realize that the only thing that gives them their legal authority is the Constitution itself?