Posted on 02/04/2011 9:12:28 PM PST by John Semmens
Federal Judge Roger Vinson’s ruling that President Obama’s health care law is unconstitutional need not be obeyed says Senator Assistant Senate Majority Leader Dick Durbin (D-Ill).
“The Courts aren’t the only ones authorized to decide the Constitutionality of the laws,” Durbin insisted. “We all—Congress and President, alike—take an oath to uphold the Constitution. Just because the Court has a different opinion doesn’t mean the President must accept it.”
“This wouldn’t be the first time a President ignored a Court decision,” Durbin observed. “Back in the 1830s, President Jackson chose to ignore a Supreme Court decision—telling then Chief Justice John Marshall to enforce his own decision. So, President Obama ignoring a lower court decision is small potatoes in comparison. In the final analysis, the President is the Commander-in-Chief. The Army and all federal law enforcement personnel answer to him. If he doesn’t want to abide by a court decision who’s going to make him?”
The Court decision President Andrew Jackson chose to ignore was one asserting that Indians had sovereign rights that the US and state governments had to respect. Subsequently, the Cherokee Tribe was forcibly evicted from its land by the US Army so it could be seized by the State of Georgia.
In related news, Obama Administration spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler said that Vinson’s ruling will have “no effect on our implementation of the health care reform law,” calling it “a rogue decision by a judge who is out of step with modern judicial thinking. It is one thing for courts to make laws that help people. It is another thing entirely when a judge tries to overturn the efforts of Congress and the President to help people. Quite simply, Judge Vinson is guilty of the wrong kind of judicial activism.”
read more...
http://azconserv1.wordpress.com/2011/02/05/senator-urges-president-to-ignore-court-ruling/
ping
“If he doesn’t want to abide by a court decision who’s going to make him?””
Answer: The People.
So dips##t Durbin thinks Obama should just be a dictator. OK, got it.
In political speak it means Obama is your dictator so the laws mean nothing.
States make laws too. So- using this reasoning it is time for the states to ignore the laws they so choose.
I guess he missed that whole “checks and balances” thing... Thinks “the won” should just do whatever he da*n well pleases. I don’t think so.
You hook em,
I’ll clean and fry em.
LOL
Well, pursuant to the “you can’t have your cake and eat it too theory”.............then can we expect that “the left” will ignore Obamacare for their reasons and “the right”, apparently led by the Wisconsin AG, will ignore it for their reasons................GOOD!....sounds like “nullification” to me and our pathetic SCOTUS can then go play with some other legal bone of lesser importance. They can start by letting Lakin out!
Obamacare was dead on the night of Nov. 2..........we just have not had it’s funeral...........”YET”...!!!!
I think it was Missouri that removed several supreme court justices! Maybe the left and the right have found something they can agree on........i.e. removal of all of em and start over! Some think that day is coming.
“The Courts aren’t the only ones authorized to decide the Constitutionality of the laws,” Durbin insisted. “We all—Congress and President, alike—take an oath to uphold the Constitution. Just because the Court has a different opinion doesn’t mean the President must accept it.”
Dick Dustbin’s corollary to the Constitution. If conservatives have to abide by Court decisions they don’t like, so do little bastards like Durbin.
If they think they don’t, those words and actions of Dustbin’s will spawn a revolution - and SHOULD.
Try that with Roe v Wade.
The LAWLESS left, only the little people MUST obey, hypocrites all.
They all, each of them need to be "retired" once and for all -- oh, and Paul Ryan and the others should "defund the various pensions, health insurance, franking, privileges" to rescue the budget and thus our deficit.
I think this becomes the definition of a Constitutional crisis. What happens if the Supreme Court rules it unconstitutional? Does Obambi ignore that?
And why would conservatives follow liberal judge rulings at the Federal level if Obama can ignore this one? Because we are suckers? ?
Payback is a bitch when Palin becomes President.
“The Courts aren’t the only ones authorized to decide the Constitutionality of the laws,” Durbin insisted. “We all—Congress and President, alike—take an oath to uphold the Constitution. Just because the Court has a different opinion doesn’t mean the President must accept it.”
Is he saying that even if the Supreme Court rules Obamacare unconstitutional it should not matter? I guess they can stop us from having those pesky elections too. Where would it stop? Seems to me, just by saying what he did he has violated his oath.
I’ll clean and fry em.
LOL
There's a whole stringer full!
And perhaps they can invite power companies to start building nuclear power plants to produce electricity and thumb their noses at the Obama Regime's No-Energy Department.
And perhaps they can invite power companies to start building nuclear power plants to produce electricity and thumb their noses at the Obama Regime's No-Energy Department.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.