Obama administration heeds judges' health care order-with link to Holder letter

CNN ^ | April 5, 2012 | By Bill Mears

[Oldeconomybuyer]

Eric Holder Response

(CNN) -- The Justice Department obeyed a federal appeals court's unusual order Thursday in a legal and political spat over the health care law championed by President Barack Obama.

Administration lawyers met their deadline and filed a three-page, single-spaced letter -- following the specific instructions of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which is hearing a challenge to the health care law. The letter affirmed the government's stance that federal courts indeed have the authority to decide the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act -- and any other law Congress passes.

A dispute involving the court and the executive branch has elevated the political stakes over whether the law will survive various legal challenges, including a pending a Supreme Court decision. The high court's ruling, expected in June, would take precedence over any other courts hearing similar appeals.

Excerpt

[samtheman]

As much as I hate Obama, and as wrong as he was with his now infamous “unprecedented” remark, I think he should have said a big FU to the court’s request for a letter of apology.

What would they have done if he refused, spanked him?

[Batman11]

“Referring to comments by Obama that set off the imbroglio, the letter concluded: “The President’s remarks were fully consistent with the principles described herein.”

No they were not! These people even lie in writing! I hope Judge Smith makes Holder rewrite his homework until he gets it correct!

[Bulwinkle]

Can’t wait to read it!

[princess leah]

This Judge may have done all of America a favor by ordering a written compliance from Obama’s justice Dept!

[Magic Fingers]

The judge requested a letter of explanation, not an apology.

[Political Junkie Too]

I thought this was done in the context of some Obamacare proceedings going on in Texas. The judge in that case asked the lawyer in that case to explain the administration's views on judicial review to test their seriousness in that case.

If the Justice Department refused, the judge could have ruled against them in that case.

-PJ

[Mr. Lucky]

The court didn't ask for a letter of apology; the court required one of the parties before it to clarify an apparent challenge to its jurisdiction.

Federal courts are limited in jurisdiction. If the court doesn't have the authority to render the relief sought by the complaint, it doesn't have jurisdiction to hear the case.

[Erik Latranyi]

As much as I hate Obama, and as wrong as he was with his now infamous “unprecedented” remark, I think he should have said a big FU to the court’s request for a letter of apology.

I think you missed the point.

The Executive Branch was saying the Judicial Branch was not an equal.

If Obama persisted, it could be considered an impeachable offense.

The Judicial Branch (and Legislative) have an obligation to ensure the other two branches do not exceed their authority.

This was a judge saying the executive was crossing a dangerous line.

[Oldeconomybuyer]

PDF Here: http://cache.abovethelaw.com/uploads/2012/04/Eric-Holder-response.pdf

[eureka!]

Tnx for posting. What a snarky response. The order was with specific reference to Barky’s comments. Methinks the DOJ under Holder is going to have a tougher time in many Federal courts after this. ~snicker~

[Batman11]

That letter is only 2& 1/4 pages long, not the 3 pages that were assigned. Judge Smith should write a big red “F”, correction he should write a big red “FU”, on it and kick it back to Holder to complete the assignment correctly!

[repentant_pundit]

PDF Here: http://cache.abovethelaw.com/uploads/2012/04/Eric-Holder-response.pdf

That letter is only 2 and a half pages long, not 3 pages as ordered by the court !

This is Contempt of Court !

.

[Carry_Okie]

The next question is whether the administration will abide by the finding of the court.

[BuckeyeTexan]

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.

[Batman11]

“The next question is whether the administration will abide by the finding of the court.”

Yes, we will see how much respect he has for the Court after they overturn ObamaIdon’tcare and he tries to go around the ruling by issuing Executive Orders!

[IrishPennant]

[Filed and served via ECF]

Holder just "mailing it in"..go figure....

[ScottinVA]

3. While duly recognizing the courts' authority to engage in judicial review, the Executive Branch has often urged courts to respect the legislative judgments of Congress. See, e.g. , Nature 's Daily. v. Glickman, 1999 WL 158 1396, at *6; State University of New York v. Anderson, 1999 WL 680463, at *6; Rojas v. Fitch, 1998 WL 457203, at *7; United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 75i v. Bro·wn Group, 1995 WL 938594, at *6.

Yes, Corruptocrat Holder, that is correct... all "urgings" by Bill Clinton. So what's your point?

[freekitty]

The letter,
http://www.foxnews.com/interactive/politics/2012/04/05/justice-department-letter-to-5th-circuit-court-appeals/

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Just posted this from Drudge:

McConnell to Obama: Back off SCOTUS