For most of my adult life, the federal judiciary was looked at by the left as their best ally in government. If Republicans took any action, the libs rushed into court to try to get that action undone. Federal Courts discovered new rights in the Constitution to meet the demands of the left. The best examples of that are the rights to privacy and to abortion. Forget which side of the argument you may support; it is undeniable that nothing in the Constitution provides that abortion is legal during the first three months of a pregnancy, possibly legal during the second three months, and illegal during the last three months. That detailed schedule, however, was the holding of the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade.
Today, all that has changed. Now the left views the federal courts as a major problem for their agenda. A good example of this view is the article by Jeffrey Toobin in the New Yorker entitled "The Threat to Obama from the Courts". Toobin actually says that the Republican Congress is no threat to Obama, but those federal courts are really something about which to worry. He gives four examples: 1) Obamacare where the Supreme Court is deciding whether or not to enforce the statute to comply with its clear language; 2) Immigration where the courts have held president Obama's executive action was illegal and not within his powers; 3) Global Warming where the courts are considering if the EPA could unilaterally declare war on coal without any agreement from Congress to authorize such action; and 4) Net Neutrality where the courts are being asked to undo more executive action taking control of the internet despite prior clear rulings that absent action by Congress, there was no power to do so. It's a funny article for a lawyer like me to read. I know that Toobin has been following legal proceedings for years; he understands the American Constitution. Nevertheless, Toobin is having a fit about the possibility that the courts may actually force Obama to abide by that Constitution. The president has limits on his powers and the courts are going to insist those limits be observed. Oh no!!!! How could such a travesty occur!!!
The truth is that the danger to Obama's programs has not come from the courts. That danger is the result of Obama refusing to follow the Constitution. A president who told the nation more than 20 times that he did not have the power to take the immigration actions that he then took, doesn't get the requisite power by acting. He still lacks the power to do what he did.
Today, all that has changed. Now the left views the federal courts as a major problem for their agenda. A good example of this view is the article by Jeffrey Toobin in the New Yorker entitled "The Threat to Obama from the Courts". Toobin actually says that the Republican Congress is no threat to Obama, but those federal courts are really something about which to worry. He gives four examples: 1) Obamacare where the Supreme Court is deciding whether or not to enforce the statute to comply with its clear language; 2) Immigration where the courts have held president Obama's executive action was illegal and not within his powers; 3) Global Warming where the courts are considering if the EPA could unilaterally declare war on coal without any agreement from Congress to authorize such action; and 4) Net Neutrality where the courts are being asked to undo more executive action taking control of the internet despite prior clear rulings that absent action by Congress, there was no power to do so. It's a funny article for a lawyer like me to read. I know that Toobin has been following legal proceedings for years; he understands the American Constitution. Nevertheless, Toobin is having a fit about the possibility that the courts may actually force Obama to abide by that Constitution. The president has limits on his powers and the courts are going to insist those limits be observed. Oh no!!!! How could such a travesty occur!!!
The truth is that the danger to Obama's programs has not come from the courts. That danger is the result of Obama refusing to follow the Constitution. A president who told the nation more than 20 times that he did not have the power to take the immigration actions that he then took, doesn't get the requisite power by acting. He still lacks the power to do what he did.
No comments:
Post a Comment