Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama Warns Supreme Court: Says Overturn of Health-Care Law Would Be 'Unprecedented,..."'
Wall St. J ^ | April 02,2012 | LAURA MECKLER AND CAROL E. LEE

Posted on 04/02/2012 9:39:19 PM PDT by Steelfish

April 2, 2012 Obama Warns Supreme Court Says Overturn of Health-Care Law Would Be 'Unprecedented, Extraordinary Step'

BY LAURA MECKLER AND CAROL E. LEE

President Barack Obama predicted Monday that the Supreme Court would uphold his signature health-care law and said that overturning it would be a prime example of judicial overreach.

It was a rare instance of a president laying out his own arguments about a Supreme Court case before the justices are set to reach their decision.

In his first public comments about the case since the justices took it up last week, Mr. Obama appeared to be framing the political argument he would make should he have to face voters this fall after a loss at the high court.

"For years, ...

(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bullyinchief; dictatorinchief; kagan; narcissistinchief; obamacare; obamapoleon; obameltdown; scotus; separationofpowers; tyrantinchief; waronscotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-54 next last

1 posted on 04/02/2012 9:39:32 PM PDT by Steelfish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

It’s time for the Supreme Court to play chicken with Mr. Chickensh*t.


2 posted on 04/02/2012 9:41:38 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (It's time to WEAN the government off of our money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

This bastard actually thinks he gets to dictate!

I sure hope he gets his ass handed to him.

For our sake.


3 posted on 04/02/2012 9:41:38 PM PDT by Nik Naym (It's not my fault... I have compulsive smartass disorder.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

As though Obama hadn’t had his say already—through the pathetic, stumbling, rambling “arguments” of his Solicitor General.


4 posted on 04/02/2012 9:42:34 PM PDT by Arthur McGowan (In Edward Kennedy's America, federal funding of brothels is a right, not a privilege.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Kagan probably already told him the outcome. So does this mean she said it would stand or be overruled.


5 posted on 04/02/2012 9:46:00 PM PDT by for-q-clinton (If at first you don't succeed keep on sucking until you do succeed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer

Unfricken believeable.

You’d think that life never existed before Obama walked the earth.


6 posted on 04/02/2012 9:47:12 PM PDT by Jonty30 (What Islam and secularism have in common is that they are both death cults.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Nik Naym

Like another poster has said, maybe this ‘unelected’ Supreme Court will see that someone has ‘standing’ and will revisit the ineligibility issue.


7 posted on 04/02/2012 9:47:12 PM PDT by Cowgirl of Justice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: for-q-clinton

You KNOW she did. There is nothing honorable about her. Nothing.


8 posted on 04/02/2012 9:48:19 PM PDT by Cowgirl of Justice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish
Obama wants to be a dictator and go full- rouge.

The court is going through what was brought before them.

His Obamacare was a scheme by him and the democrats who were in control. Now, they want to threaten the court. Praying the court rules the entire thing is unconstitutional.

9 posted on 04/02/2012 9:52:55 PM PDT by Christie at the beach (I like Newt and would love to see political dead bodies on the floor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: for-q-clinton

Well I doubt Obama is arguing with a court he has heard is upholding his signature legislation.


10 posted on 04/02/2012 9:52:54 PM PDT by JLS (How to turn a recession into a depression: elect a Dem president with a big majorities in Congress)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: for-q-clinton
Kagan probably already told him the outcome.

I wonder.

11 posted on 04/02/2012 9:53:33 PM PDT by Jeff Chandler (I tried to buy a hoodie today but the store manager said they had all been shoplifted.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Cowgirl of Justice

So based on his reaction was it upheld? I think so.


12 posted on 04/02/2012 9:54:59 PM PDT by for-q-clinton (If at first you don't succeed keep on sucking until you do succeed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

I do not think Obama Chicago gangsta politics is going to impress the less feeble members of the Supreme Court.


13 posted on 04/02/2012 9:56:56 PM PDT by microgood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JLS

He’s setting a strawman up. He is saying all this crap then when it’s upheld he will say see I was right on the law and that the radical right wing court even agreed. Plus this makes it look like Kagan didn’t tell him.


14 posted on 04/02/2012 10:00:51 PM PDT by for-q-clinton (If at first you don't succeed keep on sucking until you do succeed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Flash- President lashes out against “judicial activism”!!


15 posted on 04/02/2012 10:06:33 PM PDT by SteveH (First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Since when does a president lobby the SCOTUS. They are independent branches. I hope they send his letter back saying that they will not consider it.

Grrr.


16 posted on 04/02/2012 10:08:58 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish
I hope the Supreme Court realizes, even if dimly, that their very significance and existence hinges on this ruling. If they cave to the wishes of the Executive, then that's it. The latter days of the Roman Republic. I was just reading about that, by chance:

And yet when Cicero was carrying on his Cilician campaign in strict accordance with Rome's great tradition, the Republic was dying and all but dead. That was in 51 B.C. Nine years before, three powerful party leaders had come together; they agreed to pool their resources and take the government into their own hands. But it was all completely unofficial and no one need take cognizance of it if he chose not. The senate met; the consuls presided; the old political forms were strictly adhered to ...

Edith Hamilton, The Roman Way

17 posted on 04/02/2012 10:10:46 PM PDT by dr_lew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

We need to call BS on this.

There have been other cases in which courts have ruled laws unconstitutional. For him to say it is unprecedented to overturn a law passed by a democratically elected Congress is intellectually dishonest!!!

Republicans need to add this to the list of things to use against Obama in the campaign.

Liberals have no problems when courts overturn laws, such as abortion laws, which liberals don’t like. That’s why it’s patently absurd for him to say this. Liberals love the courts to overturn laws they don’t like. Liberals love it when courts impose new standards, such as affirmative action or homosexual marriage.

But I guess we can’t expect the liberals to be intellectually honest can we????


18 posted on 04/02/2012 10:18:04 PM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

"Those ding-danged Justices were selected not elected!

Uh, wait, those two I selected are OK, uhhhh."

19 posted on 04/02/2012 10:18:59 PM PDT by TigersEye (Life is about choices. Your choices. Make good ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

I hope the Supremes Polk that half cracker right in the eye with Unconstitutional !


20 posted on 04/02/2012 10:25:04 PM PDT by celtic gal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-54 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson