Obozo Puts His foot in His Mouth Once Again

Rate this post

For Someone Who Proclaims He Used to Teach Constitutional Law, He Sure Does Not Know A Lot ABout Or Anything About the Constitution


Judicial activism is when courts do not confine themselves to reasonable interpretations of laws, but instead create law. Alternatively, judicial activism is when courts do not limit their ruling to the dispute before them, but instead establish a new rule to apply broadly to issues not presented in the specific action. “Judicial activism” is when judges substitute their own political opinions for the applicable law, or when judges act like a legislature (legislating from the bench) rather than like a traditional court. In so doing, the court takes for itself the powers of Congress, rather than limiting itself to the powers traditionally given to the judiciary.
Hey Obama, it’s not judicial activism when the Supreme Court shoots down your ridiculous unconstitutional law…it’s called upholding the rule of law and the CONSTITUTION, you idiot
Tom in NC

Please follow and like us:
0
 

0 responses to “Obozo Puts His foot in His Mouth Once Again

  1. it is a wonder-it-has any feet left!

     
  2. Dang, this is Social Studies from 5th Grade… it’s the Supreme Court’s job to do that, Checks and Balances.

     
  3. wildbillalaska

    SINCE THERE IS NO SEVER-ABILITY CLAUSE IN THE LAW ONCE THE INDIVIDUAL MANDATE IS THROWN OUT THE REST OF THE LAW CANNOT STAND ON ITS OWN.THIS POWER CRAZED,NARCISSISTIC,ARROGANT,LYING PIECE OF PIG EXCREMENT HAS TO BE DEFEATED AT THE POLLS IN NOVEMBER OR AS THE OLD SAYING GOES ‘ YOU AINT SEEN NOTHING YET ” AS FAR AS TYRANNY IN THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH GOES.
    Wild Bill Alaska
    https://www.theblaze.com/stories/obama-warns-unelected-supremes-overturning-my-law-would-be-judicial-activism/

     
  4. This just in…
    “Appeals Court Fires Back at Obama’s Comments on Health Care Case,” by Jan Crawford, CBS News, 3 April 2012
    https://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504564_162-57408827-504564/appeals-court-fires-back-at-obamas-comments-on-health-care-case/
    “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 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.”

     
  5. The constitution of what country did he teach? Kenya, Indonesia, China? His records are sealed so do we really knnow what he was teaching? Something from Saul Alinsky or Bill Ayers?

     
  6. Since he’s constitutionally challenged to hold the office he claims to possess, expecting him to behave in accordance with the Constitution is unreasonable.
    Waiting for an election to change things is asking for too much, the rigorous application of the mandates and principles of the Constitution is what we need, which, means that We the People have to rise up and insist on that………………………………another election in the current moral climate won’t suffice. None of the candidates running for president have presented a coherent plan that will correct the flagrant disregard for our Constitution and restore the human economy of the USA and other sovreign nations back to prosperity.
    Austerity and same sex marriage is not a recipe for a healthy human economic policy. We need to reinstate Glass Steagall to delegitimize the gambling bankers debts and then revert to a fixed exchange rate between sovreign nations, as well as uttering credit through the Congress constitutionally for projects of a magnitude large enough to put everyone back to work and get back to good old American PROGRESS, scientific progress.
    We gotta keep up with the times…………………………….

     
  7. The “Hoof-in-mouth” stage passed when he was first posed for the Office of President! He, all of his cronies and the maimstream media have CLEARLY advanced to an advanced stage of “cranial-rectal occlusion”!

     
  8. edward oleander

    “Judicial Activism” has been made into a semantically null phrase. It has come to mean any ruling not to the liking of the group doing the whining. At first it was promulgated by the right, but it seems we Libs have jumped on that bandwagon recently as well.
    Even I’m guilty of it… I called the recent expansion of “strip-search” permissions judicial activism… and so it goes…

     

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *