Because to the Obama administration, "unconstitutional" is anything that they don't like. It's a "flawed" document, don-cha-know...
Posted on 02/23/2011 4:36:13 PM PST by dont_tread_on_malik
This tussle in Florida over the “clarity” of Judge Roger Vinson’s ruling that ObamaCare is unconstitutional is further unfolding. From the tone of Vinson’s comments on the matter, the DOJ’s push for the ruling to be clarified is not sitting too well with him:
(Excerpt) Read more at 21statelawsuit.com ...
Because to the Obama administration, "unconstitutional" is anything that they don't like. It's a "flawed" document, don-cha-know...
He did not issue a clear injunction, and is now shocked Obambi and the fedgov ignored him. Sorry, the judge should be smarter than that. More than likly he was trying not make to much fuss.
Read closely the last paragraph in post #20.
“...will decide what Constituional means.”
Actually as President he has the responsibility and authority to do just that, and unlike Bush who signed into law something that he even said as he signed it was Un-Constitutional (the McCain-Fiengold act) the O seems to be taking up the powers that most modern Presidents have let the courts usurp. Not that this is necessarily a good thing given who the O is but if he wins this it will set a precedent for future Presidents that are hopefully more conservative (would mean that everything is on the table, abortion, gun rights, you name it). It also means that we are possibly entering very chaotic times where now instead of just having to deal with the whims of federal judges we have to deal with the whims of Presidential administrations as well.
that paragraph is meaningless unless someone with guns is prepared to back it up.
Obama knows no one will come at his SS with guns. So he can do as he likes,, laws be damned.
Pretty selective “Uphold and Defend the Constitution”, when he refuses to even PROVE that he is a “Natural Born Citizen”, doncha think?
Look at the issue that Holder and Obama have decided to today the 14th is quoted for the 5th Amendment in the DOMA. a clarification is needed for Obama and Holder to understand injunction and the entire ruling is null and void and unconstitutional. Come now Obama states he graduated from Harvard Law School, he is a Constitutional Scholar whom taught at the University of Chicago. Look at the 14 th amendemnt the issue of citizenship is in the same paragraph as the equal protection and due process clause. Come now Holder and Obama you need a clarification. really are you this dense. Do America a favor Holder and Obama turn yourseves in as the frauds and charlatans you truly are. Let the US Marshalls do you a favor, arrest you for your own criminal stupidity.
-——Obama knows no one will come at his SS with guns——
Think Caligula, think the Praetorian guard
I fear that the outcome with his cousin Raila Odinga was a warning to us. This guy is very scary. He has created havoc, and I think that was his intent. I hope he’ll be out of office in two years and we survive it as a nation. Stinking crooked, unions and all, set to take to the street in the states that are BROKE. What part of BROKE do they not understand?
“Pretty selective “Uphold and Defend the Constitution”, when he refuses to even PROVE that he is a “Natural Born Citizen”, doncha think?”
Sure but that’s what I meant, also what exactly does it mean to be a “Natural Born Citizen”. I looked that up and the Constitution does not define that term. people seem to imply that you must be born on US soil but if one or more of your parents is a US citizen why would that not qualify you as a “Natural Born Citizen” no matter where you were born? Just saying.
Issuing a bench warrant for Holder for contempt of court would sober up the cokeheads of the Obama administration. Thanks dont_tread_on_malik.
ping
YES ... they are in contempt!
“...will decide what Constituional means.”
Actually as President he has the responsibility and authority to do just that
Are you serious?
Re: federal officers will adhere to the law
With Zero in charge, this cannot be assumed. The Court will be required to establish unusual requirements and specifications on the gov.
You didn’t see post #20, did you?
Instead of the judge giving them the normal 2 weeks to reply, he changed it to 3 days instead, haha)
Under the Local Rules of this court, the plaintiffs would ordinarily have fourteen (14) days in which to file a response to the defendants’’ motion. However, because time is of the essence in this matter, and because everyone in this country would obviously benefit from certainty and final resolution of the case sooner rather than later, I do not think it necessary or appropriate to adhere to the briefing schedule that would normally apply. Accordingly, from the date of this Order, the plaintiffs shall have three (3) business days in which to file their response in opposition to the defendants’’ motion.
totally useless info unless the judge sends men with guns after Obama,, won't happen.....
“Are you serious?”
Amazing as it seems, Presidents in the past have frequently ignored federal court rulings. Look at Lincoln’s history and how he ignored USC rulings about confederate POW’s. Also look at the oath of office that they take, “... will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”. It doesn’t say as interpreted by the Federal courts, he is responsible for that interpretation and if he see’s it differently than the courts it is his responsibility to act accordingly. And up until FDR they did on occasion act against the courts view of the matter.
Re: what can the judge do to enforce his order?
This line of thought is intriguing ... what have federal judges done over the past 150 years to force their rulings upon mini-dictators ?
Anyone?
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.