• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Court?

Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

AdamT said:
IF it gets struck down I would say that it would be the mark of an irresponsible Supreme Court.

Further explication by President Obama:
Click to expand...

HAHA, wow. Thanks for that wonderful transcript.

President Obama said:
We have not seen a court overturn a law that was passed by Congress on an economic issue like health care, that I think most people would clearly consider commerce.
Click to expand...

Really President Obama? We have never seen that? I don't know about that....lets ask president obama.

President Obama said:
A law like that has not been overturned, at least since Lochner. Right? So we’re going to back to the ‘30s, pre-New Deal.
Click to expand...

WOAH! Will you look at that. President Obama seemed to just counter your statement that it's never happened President Obama. I guess what you really meant to say was "IT hasn't happened in a long time and now its happening ot me so I don't like it so its bad and it's obvious that its political becuase who could dare disagree with me becuase I'm always right, just like when I suggsted it never happened and then immedietely contradicted myself".

You know, for being a Law Professor, you'd think he'd have realized that there's been NUMEROUS times in this countries history where the court has done something unprecedented for the first time because its the first time hte issue has came up in such a way before OR because the situation is different enough compared to the past times that it warrants different action. If Obama has such a hard time with "unprecedented" acts by the court perhaps he should seek to begin his argument against Brown v. The Board of Education, or perhaps Marbury v. Madison.

I swear, every time I hear Obama spew his idealogy driven ridiculous snipes and whines I just imagine a frankenstien forum monster of DonSoutherland's writing style and ability mixed with something like Deuce or Grant's political mentality.
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

Perhaps Obama should recall this particular line:

Chief Justice John Marshall said:
"To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing, if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained?"
Click to expand...

And also that the Constitution places itself before the laws of the United States.

Unprecedented or not, and it's clearly not by Obama's own words, if the Court feels that the law is unconstiuttional and that its abilities are beyond the scope of hte limited powers set forth by the document then they have taken an oath to strike it down regardless of whether or not it hasn't happened in 80 years or if the President is immedietely attempting to suggest that there's political motives and actions at play here. It is the duty and responsability of the Supreme Court to uphold the Constitution, not to make sure that Congress gets its way.
 
Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

American said:
You're right, he only told them if they overturn the law it would amount to judicial activism.
Click to expand...
Something which might never have occurred to this Constitutional scholar was that "unprecedented" "judicial activism" has occurred over 1,300 times in the history of the Republic.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_laws_has_the_US_Supreme_Court_declared_unconstitutional

All he had to do was google.
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

Zyphlin said:
HAHA, wow. Thanks for that wonderful transcript.



Really President Obama? We have never seen that? I don't know about that....lets ask president obama.



WOAH! Will you look at that. President Obama seemed to just counter your statement that it's never happened President Obama. I guess what you really meant to say was "IT hasn't happened in a long time and now its happening ot me so I don't like it so its bad and it's obvious that its political becuase who could dare disagree with me becuase I'm always right, just like when I suggsted it never happened and then immedietely contradicted myself".

You know, for being a Law Professor, you'd think he'd have realized that there's been NUMEROUS times in this countries history where the court has done something unprecedented for the first time because its the first time hte issue has came up in such a way before OR because the situation is different enough compared to the past times that it warrants different action. If Obama has such a hard time with "unprecedented" acts by the court perhaps he should seek to begin his argument against Brown v. The Board of Education, or perhaps Marbury v. Madison.

I swear, every time I hear Obama spew his idealogy driven ridiculous snipes and whines I just imagine a frankenstien forum monster of DonSoutherland's writing style and ability mixed with something like Deuce or Grant's political mentality.
Click to expand...

Seriously? You think it's a valid debate tactic to analyze each sentence of an off-the-cuff statement in isolation? Good Lord. :roll:
 
Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

Someone needs to tell Obama to shut up. He's under a lot of pressure and stress, and it's beginning to show. Sad to watch.
 
Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

AdamT said:
Seriously? You think it's a valid debate tactic to analyze each sentence of an off-the-cuff statement in isolation? Good Lord. :roll:
Click to expand...

It was a prepared statement by the POTUS on a pending SCOTUS decision ...... "Off the cuff" my ass. Further, the 5th Circuit has ordered an explanation by the DOJ as to the contempt shown by the Executive:

Appeals court fires back at Obama's comments on health care case - Crossroads - CBS News

Dear Leader looks like a Constitutional idiot.
 
Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

Neal N. Bloeme said:
Someone needs to tell Obama to shut up. He's under a lot of pressure and stress, and it's beginning to show. Sad to watch.
Click to expand...


Yeah, he should say intelligent things like "Babies from rape are a gift from God" like Santorum.
 
Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

Eighty Deuce said:
It was a prepared statement by the POTUS on a pending SCOTUS decision ......
Click to expand...

The statement Zyphlin referenced was made by Obama in response to a reporter's question after his prepared remarks about the Republican's budget.
 
Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

Zyphlin said:
HAHA, wow. Thanks for that wonderful transcript.



Really President Obama? We have never seen that? I don't know about that....lets ask president obama.



WOAH! Will you look at that. President Obama seemed to just counter your statement that it's never happened President Obama. I guess what you really meant to say was "IT hasn't happened in a long time and now its happening ot me so I don't like it so its bad and it's obvious that its political becuase who could dare disagree with me becuase I'm always right, just like when I suggsted it never happened and then immedietely contradicted myself".

You know, for being a Law Professor, you'd think he'd have realized that there's been NUMEROUS times in this countries history where the court has done something unprecedented for the first time because its the first time hte issue has came up in such a way before OR because the situation is different enough compared to the past times that it warrants different action. If Obama has such a hard time with "unprecedented" acts by the court perhaps he should seek to begin his argument against Brown v. The Board of Education, or perhaps Marbury v. Madison.

I swear, every time I hear Obama spew his idealogy driven ridiculous snipes and whines I just imagine a frankenstien forum monster of DonSoutherland's writing style and ability mixed with something like Deuce or Grant's political mentality.
Click to expand...

I disagree that he doesn't know all this. He knows it all too well. This man is a malcontent, even after he swore an oath to preserve the Constitution. He looks at what FDR accomplished with a stacked court, and he wants to do the same thing.
 
Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

AdamT said:
The statement Zyphlin referenced was made by Obama in response to a reporter's question after his prepared remarks about the Republican's budget.
Click to expand...

The "legal scholar and Constitutional Law professor" ,puke> decides to make a statement about SCOTUS and Obamacare, and gets asked a question, and its now "off the cuff" ............ that's BS only a mother could love.
 
Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

ReverendHellh0und said:
So SCOTUS aren't "constitutional experts"? and please, by all means, please back up with links and arguments backing up your "most" claim. Furthermore, which specific precedents are you refering to? This argument lacks much substance.
Click to expand...


So I guess you missed this adamT?
 
Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

Grant said:
Something which might never have occurred to this Constitutional scholar was that "unprecedented" "judicial activism" has occurred over 1,300 times in the history of the Republic.

How many laws has the US Supreme Court declared unconstitutional

All he had to do was google.
Click to expand...

The core problem with Obama's definition is that he basically stated that upholding the Constitution through judicial review, amounted to judicial activism.
 
Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

AdamT said:
The statement Zyphlin referenced was made by Obama in response to a reporter's question after his prepared remarks about the Republican's budget.
Click to expand...

So we should only now quote his teleprompter and not his response to any follow up questions?
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

ReverendHellh0und said:
So I guess you missed this adamT?
Click to expand...

So SCOTUS aren't "constitutional experts"? and please, by all means, please back up with links and arguments backing up your "most" claim. Furthermore, which specific precedents are you refering to? This argument lacks much substance.
Click to expand...

Sure, SC justices are constitutional experts. So is the President. I was obviously talking about independent experts. I recently posted a survey of former clerks to sitting justices and other attorneys who have argued before the SC bench. Only 35% thought the law would be overturned. Here's Charles Fried -- Reagan's former Solicitor General -- saying that, not only is the mandate constitutional, but Congress COULD in fact pass a law requiring people to buy broccoli: Harvard Law's Fried: A Broccoli Mandate is Constitutional - Forbes

And some diverse opinions from other experts (discount the guy who represents the plaintiffs): Is the Health Care Law Unconstitutional? - NYTimes.com

Akhil Amar, one of the preeminent constitutional law scholars in the country, defending the mandate: Akhil Reed Amar | Constitutional showdown - Los Angeles Times

Lawrence Tribe, probably THE preeminent constitutional law scholar, defending the mandate: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/08/opinion/08tribe.html?_r=1

And Irwin Chemerinsky -- with Tribe and Amar, probably one of the top three conlaw experts in America -- defending the mandate: Opinion: Health care reform is constitutional - Erwin Chemerinsky - POLITICO.com

Chemerinsky literally wrote the book that I used to study constitutional law.
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

Grant said:
So we should only now quote his teleprompter and not his response to any follow up questions?
Click to expand...

You miss the point.
 
Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

AdamT said:
You miss the point.
Click to expand...

Perhaps I did.

So what was your point in saying that "The statement Zyphlin referenced was made by Obama in response to a reporter's question after his prepared remarks about the Republican's budget"".?

His response to reporters questions following his "prepared remarks"should not be taken seriously? Not be analyzed to harshly? Be ignored?
 
Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

AdamT said:
Only 35% thought the law would be overturned.
Click to expand...

The wonders of statistics. Note that you stated "thought the law would be overturned" not whether or not that they "thought hte law should be overturned".

I'd likely state if asked "Do you think Obama will be voted out" a clear "no" at this point. You'd get a yes from me if you asked "Do you think Obama should be voted out".

If asked about the health care law and whether it would be overturned or not, I'd probably put more confidence in saying "no" prior to the trial then "yes". I expected 7 of the votes to be set in stone, 3 for not constitutional and 4 for constitutional. I figured there was an 8th vote that was likely to go for not constitutional but I could percieve possibly voting for constitutional. There was finally a 9th swing vote, and prior to questioning I would've had more confidence stating that the swing vote would fall on the side of "Constitutional". The fact that I think it would be overturned though doesn't necessarily mean I agree with such a decision from a constitutional stand point but rather am answering based on what I think the court will do.
 
Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

AdamT said:
Sure, SC justices are constitutional experts. So is the President. I was obviously talking about independent experts. I recently posted a survey of former clerks to sitting justices and other attorneys who have argued before the SC bench. Only 35% thought the law would be overturned. Here's Charles Fried -- Reagan's former Solicitor General -- saying that, not only is the mandate constitutional, but Congress COULD in fact pass a law requiring people to buy broccoli: Harvard Law's Fried: A Broccoli Mandate is Constitutional - Forbes

And some diverse opinions from other experts (discount the guy who represents the plaintiffs): Is the Health Care Law Unconstitutional? - NYTimes.com

Akhil Amar, one of the preeminent constitutional law scholars in the country, defending the mandate: Akhil Reed Amar | Constitutional showdown - Los Angeles Times

Lawrence Tribe, probably THE preeminent constitutional law scholar, defending the mandate: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/08/opinion/08tribe.html?_r=1

And Irwin Chemerinsky -- with Tribe and Amar, probably one of the top three conlaw experts in America -- defending the mandate: Opinion: Health care reform is constitutional - Erwin Chemerinsky - POLITICO.com

Chemerinsky literally wrote the book that I used to study constitutional law.
Click to expand...



hmm, so you claim "most", yet retort with 4..... A simple google finds other "experts" who disagree with you and your fantastic 4's assement....

Why the health care reform law is unconstitutional - CNN.com


I could easily find more, if you like, easily dispelling your myth of "most"....
 
Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

Zyphlin said:
The wonders of statistics. Note that you stated "thought the law would be overturned" not whether or not that they "thought hte law should be overturned".

I'd likely state if asked "Do you think Obama will be voted out" a clear "no" at this point. You'd get a yes from me if you asked "Do you think Obama should be voted out".

If asked about the health care law and whether it would be overturned or not, I'd probably put more confidence in saying "no" prior to the trial then "yes". I expected 7 of the votes to be set in stone, 3 for not constitutional and 4 for constitutional. I figured there was an 8th vote that was likely to go for not constitutional but I could percieve possibly voting for constitutional. There was finally a 9th swing vote, and prior to questioning I would've had more confidence stating that the swing vote would fall on the side of "Constitutional". The fact that I think it would be overturned though doesn't necessarily mean I agree with such a decision from a constitutional stand point but rather am answering based on what I think the court will do.
Click to expand...

Okay. Now address Amar, Tribe, and Chemerinsky, who are, I think most legal scholars would concede, the top three, or at least among the top five constitutional law scholars in the country. And Fried -- Reagan's Solicitor General.
 
Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

ReverendHellh0und said:
hmm, so you claim "most", yet retort with 4..... A simple google finds other "experts" who disagree with you and your fantastic 4's assement....

Why the health care reform law is unconstitutional - CNN.com


I could easily find more, if you like, easily dispelling your myth of "most"....
Click to expand...

Did I say that it was unanimous? No.

How renowned is your expert? An associate professor at George Mason School of Law? :doh

A regular writer at "The Volohk Conspiracy"? "The Volokh Conspiracy is a blog which mostly covers United States legal and political issues, generally from a libertarian or conservative perspective." :doh
 
Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

AdamT said:
Sure, SC justices are constitutional experts. So is the President.
Click to expand...

I have seen zero evidence, based on his words that can be found, that shows the president to be one.
 
Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

Arbo said:
I have seen zero evidence, based on his words that can be found, that shows the president to be one.
Click to expand...

He was a professor of constitutional law at a top-five law school. That qualifies him as an expert.
 
Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

AdamT said:
Irwin Chemerinsky
Click to expand...

Perhaps Obama should take a lesson from Chemerinsky concerning complaints about the court acting on Judicial Activism.

"Judicial activism is the label for the decision that people don't like."

Or does that quote only apply when its a decision HE doesn't like? (And that Obama doesn't like)
 
Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

Zyphlin said:
Perhaps Obama should take a lesson from Chemerinsky concerning complaints about the court acting on Judicial Activism.

"Judicial activism is the label for the decision that people don't like."

Or does that quote only apply when its a decision HE doesn't like? (And that Obama doesn't like)
Click to expand...

Apparently it only applies when its a decision that conservatives don't like. They get very prickly when the tables are turned on them.
 
Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

AdamT said:
Well then you have not been seeing it correctly, because -- particularly in the context of a commerce clause challenge -- Congress is given HUGE discretion. Google "rational basis" for a thorough discussion.
Click to expand...

You're confusing what your opinion is they have done, with intent and purpose. In the 200+ years yes the SCOTUS has sometimes given deference... however my point is that is NOT their purpose - not then, not now. It's very clear why the framers created the 3 distinct sections of government. On a side note, pretty much anything can be "rationalized"...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom