Draggingtree Posted April 3, 2012 Share Posted April 3, 2012 Crossroads: April 3, 2012 3:42 PM Appeals court fires back at Obama's comments on health care case By Jan Crawford Topics Supreme Court (CBS News) In the escalating battle between the administration and the judiciary, a federal appeals court apparently is calling the president's bluff -- ordering the Justice Department to answer by Thursday whether the Obama Administration believes that the courts have the right to strike down a federal law, according to a lawyer who was in the courtroom. The order, by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, appears to be in direct response to the president's comments yesterday about the Supreme Court's review of the health care law. Mr. Obama all but threw down the gauntlet with the justices, saying he was "confident" the Court would not "take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress." Overturning a law of course would not be unprecedented -- since the Supreme Court since 1803 has asserted the power to strike down laws it interprets as unconstitutional. The three-judge appellate court appears to be asking the administration to admit that basic premise -- despite the president's remarks that implied the contrary. The panel ordered the Justice Department to submit a three-page, single-spaced letter by noon Thursday addressing whether the Executive Branch believes courts have such power, the lawyer said. The panel is hearing a separate challenge to the health care law by physician-owned hospitals. The issue arose when a lawyer for the Justice Department began arguing before the judges. Appeals Court Judge Jerry Smith immediately interrupted, asking if DOJ agreed that the judiciary could strike down an unconstitutional law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rokke Posted April 3, 2012 Share Posted April 3, 2012 CBS News: (CBS News) In the escalating battle between the administration and the judiciary, a federal appeals court apparently is calling the president's bluff -- ordering the Justice Department to answer by Thursday whether the Obama Administration believes that the courts have the right to strike down a federal law, according to a lawyer who was in the courtroom. The order, by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, appears to be in direct response to the president's comments yesterday about the Supreme Court's review of the health care law. Mr. Obama all but threw down the gauntlet with the justices, saying he was "confident" the Court would not "take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress." Overturning a law of course would not be unprecedented -- since the Supreme Court since 1803 has asserted the power to strike down laws it interprets as unconstitutional. The three-judge appellate court appears to be asking the administration to admit that basic premise -- despite the president's remarks that implied the contrary. The panel ordered the Justice Department to submit a three-page, single-spaced letter by noon Thursday addressing whether the Executive Branch believes courts have such power, the lawyer said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rokke Posted April 3, 2012 Share Posted April 3, 2012 Well, I guess Obama has now managed to tick off Federal Judges. I wonder if that will suddenly change the status of his eligibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrWoodchuck Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 The Obfuscator-in-Chief issued a weasel-ly rebuttal to the 5th Appeals Court, tut tutting & a-hemming.....after someone pointed out that there are 3 distinct & separate branches of government & only 1&1/2 are currently co-opted by Obama & Progtardians. He was absent @ Harvard when they covered that aspect of the Constitution. [ He was @ Coopers-Union for the Democratic Socialists of America Conference during that time.....he may have skipped skool to hear what other socialists were talkin' about] 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evad Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Great gawd...to think this guy was a law professor (alleged) at one of the most prestigious institutions in the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evad Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Great gawd...to think this guy was a law professor (alleged) at one of the most prestigious institutions in the world. For the 729th recorded time, Dear Leader has blamed Bush for his own short comings. Pelosi and Reid have a combined 826 recorded blame Bush moments. Being a lib-dem means "Never having to say you're responsible". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrWoodchuck Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Great gawd...to think this guy was a law professor (alleged) at one of the most prestigious institutions in the world. For the 729th recorded time, Dear Leader has blamed Bush for his own short comings. Pelosi and Reid have a combined 826 recorded blame Bush moments. Being a lib-dem means "Never having to say you're responsible". @Evad Someone has to have been making those mistakes.....and they are much too "enlightened" to have been the "wunz." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casino67 Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 I hope that any Justice that may have been considering retiring during this A-hole's term now has second thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now