Whats This?!!11! An Appeals court DARES challenge Obama?!

[Mr Mannn]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/101489399#post2

TupperHappy (66 posts)
Appeals court fires back at Obama's comments on health care case

 Source: 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.
 

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.
 


Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504564_162-57408827-504564/appeals-court-fires-back-at-obamas-comments-on-health-care-case/


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

***********

Ummmm... OK?

tularetom(15,716 posts)

2. The Court of Appeals is not the boss of Obama

He can say anything he wants about what the court has and hasn't the right to do.
 
Separation of powers y'know.

F*** those black robed douchebags.

Iliyah(1,040 posts)

6. I think Pres O
is playing chess and the some radical justices from both courts are falling into his trap. What exactly it is I don't know but I think Pres O and his administration are inching towards health care for all. Just a feeling tho.
 
And said health care will be paid for.

[FlippyDoo]

Iliyah(1,040 posts)

6. I think Pres O
is playing chess and the some radical justices from both courts are falling into his trap. What exactly it is I don't know but I think Pres O and his administration are inching towards health care for all. Just a feeling tho.
 
And said health care will be paid for.

I hate to break the news to you Iliyah, but you give the big 0 too much credit. You try to make it sound like he is some brilliant strategist who is weaving a cleverly hidden trap into which will stumble unsuspecting opponents. I'm not so sure that he could weave a trap that would snare a blind rabbit zoomed up on heron. Of course, he is indeed more than able of weaving a trap that will snare leftist, but everyone knows that leftist don't have the intelligence and vision of a blind rabbit zoomed up on heron.

[Airwolf]

No. **** Obama. Seperation of powers goes for him as well. He has now power over any court when it comes to how they rule for or against him and congress.  They however though congress do have the power to impeach him for high crimes and misdemeanors. The way Obama is going he might get to be the second president in history to be delt with in that manner.

[GOBUCKS]

The centerpiece of Roosevelt's first term was the National Recovery Act.

It was much bigger to Roosevelt than commiecare is to the Kenyan.

About a year after enactment, it was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

Roosevelt was re-elected to three more terms, so don't think the muslim is a goner if his healthcare scheme goes down the tubes.
 

[Ballygrl]

Just curious, what happens if they fail to respond?

[Duke Nukum]

"Running around in a blind panic"/"Playing Chess" : "tomato"/"potato"

[Delmar]

Just curious, what happens if they fail to respond?

Then just hammer on the buffoon some more.  Keep hammering him from all sides from now until election day. 

[Ballygrl]

Then just hammer on the buffoon some more.  Keep hammering him from all sides from now until election day.  

Are they in contempt though if they don't respond?

[Mr Mannn]

Are they in contempt though if they don't respond?

THAT would be a feather in an election year cap. 

[zeitgeist]

The centerpiece of Roosevelt's first term was the National Recovery Act.

It was much bigger to Roosevelt than commiecare is to the Kenyan.

About a year after enactment, it was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

Roosevelt was re-elected to three more terms, so don't think the muslim is a goner if his healthcare scheme goes down the tubes.
 

And the greatest question from the Roosevelt era is:

Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942), was a United States Supreme Court decision that recognized the power of the federal government to regulate economic activity.
 
A farmer, Roscoe Filburn, was growing wheat for on-farm consumption. The U.S. government had established limits on wheat production based on acreage owned by a farmer, in order to drive up wheat prices during the Great Depression, and Filburn was growing more than the limits permitted. Filburn was ordered to destroy his crops and pay a fine, even though he was producing the excess wheat for his own use and had no intention of selling it.
The Supreme Court interpreted the United States Constitution's Commerce Clause under Article 1 Section 8, which permits the United States Congress "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes". The Court decided that Filburn's wheat growing activities reduced the amount of wheat he would buy for chicken feed on the open market, and because wheat was traded nationally, Filburn's production of more wheat than he was allotted was affecting interstate commerce. Thus, Filburn's production could be regulated by the federal government.
{snip}

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn

It has always galled me that this was decision was allowed to stand. 

[Delmar]

Are they in contempt though if they don't respond?

I would think that the executive branch wouldn't be obligated to respond to judicial branch in the same way that SCOTUS can ignore Obama's rose garden whine fest and rule against Obamacare.  

[DumbAss Tanker]

Iliyah(1,040 posts)

6. I think Pres O
is playing chess and the some radical justices from both courts are falling into his trap. 

He's playing with something, all right, but the jury's still out on whether it's "Fire" or "His own wiener."

[wasp69]

He's playing with something, all right, but the jury's still out on whether it's "Fire" or "His own wiener."

Kinda goes with the thought that just because you are digging in your ass does not mean you are an archaeologist.

[jukin]

He's playing with something, all right, but the jury's still out on whether it's "Fire" or "His own wiener."

It's both at the same time. 0bama is multi-tasking his way to a burnt organ, cause he so smart!

[Kyle Ricky]

I look for there to be a major liberal revolt towards the SCOTUS if they do overturn obamacare.

[Maxiest]

I have heard several liberal talking heads say it was a bad idea for him to come out and challenge the justices.  Hope they are right.

[BlueStateSaint]

I have heard several liberal talking heads say it was a bad idea for him to come out and challenge the justices.  Hope they are right.

I'd love to see the vote overturning it go from 5-4 to 6-3 or 7-2, based on what the Obamessiah said/did.

[Ballygrl]

Kinda goes with the thought that just because you are digging in your ass does not mean you are an archaeologist.

Oh that's so signature worthy, adds it to my list of siggys when I change them, with proper credit of course.

[wasp69]

Oh that's so signature worthy, adds it to my list of siggys when I change them, with proper credit of course.

 

[AllosaursRus]

He's playing with something, all right, but the jury's still out on whether it's "Fire" or "His own wiener."

I've already figured out he's playin' with his own wiener.

Heaven knows ya wouldn't want the "Gorilla" playin' with it! I doubt it would stay attached! Why do ya think they went to Vegas? Even the pres needs some stress relief! Although, I doubt this one has much stress.

He sure as hell tries not to do the peoples work! Never seen a pres that was as much a slacker as this asshole!

[DumbAss Tanker]

Just curious, what happens if they fail to respond?

This is not occurring in isolation, it is in a case where the DOJ is representing one side of an active case.  The order is therefore to the DOJ, not Obama.  When you do not give the judge or panel in a forum what they ask for, be it a clarification of your position or compliance with a discovery order, they are free to impose a variety of sanctions on you, ranging from limiting you from pursuing a certain argument, to civil contempt, to imposing exclusionary rules on entire parts of your case (Including evidence) relating to that issue in ways that can functionally equate to swimming with the proverbial concrete overshoes.

[Wineslob]

tularetom(15,716 posts)

2. The Court of Appeals is not the boss of Obama

He can say anything he wants about what the court has and hasn't the right to do.
 
Separation of powers y'know.
F*** those black robed douchebags.

Yes he can, but it don't mean shit.  

He's circumvented that, how many times?

Sooooo much stupid..........