Obama Spits on the Constitution…Again

Well, folks, he’s at it again. Most of us are already painfully aware of President Obama’s blatant assault on the United States’ Constitution. Remember the Defense of Marriage Act? The Department of Justice decided it no longer wanted to defend that law in court, despite the fact that it’s legally obliged to do so. Don’t believe me? Take it from Mr. Eric Holder himself, who originally supported the DOJ’s decision to defend the Defense of Marriage Act: ““Whether we agree with them or not, the Justice Department by tradition is bound to do so [defend laws in court] … Anybody who knows me knows that this is not a statute that I agree with, but there are times as lawyers when obligations that we have and the traditions of the Justice Department to defend an act with which we do not agree.” It seems that Holder has something of a selective memory, though, because shortly thereafter, the Department of Justice decided it wasn’t going to defend the Act. An Attorney General who forgets about the laws he’s supposed to follow. What a comforting thought.

Sadly, the President’s “assault”  didn’t stop there. Remember what the 4th amendment says about unwarranted search and seizure? Yeah, well according to the Obama administration and the TSA, you forfeit those rights the moment you walk through a metal detector. Or, for that matter, a full-body scanner. Oh, and Libya? Evidently the President can now bomb countries and send in troops without Congressional approval. Who knew.

Now, our glorious Commander-in-Chief has set his sights on something even more integral to this nation’s survival: judicial review. Since 1803, the Supreme Court has claimed the power of judicial review. In other words, the Court holds the power to strike down laws that it deems unconstitutional. To me, and most of America, this ability is a reasonable check on Congressional and Executive power. President Obama thinks otherwise. According to Fox News, the President recently tore into the Supreme Court, saying he was “confident that the Supreme 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. And I’d just remind conservative commentators that for years what we’ve heard is the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint, that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law. Well, this is a good example. And I’m pretty confident that this court will recognize that and not take that step [striking down Obamacare].”

An unelected group of people overturning a duly passed law…yep, that sounds like the Supreme Court to me. I’m not really sure what law books Obama read at Harvard, but he obviously didn’t read the right ones. I’d advise him to look up the Marbury vs. Madison case. That should give him all of the information he needs to realize the utter stupidity of his statement. The Supreme Court’s job is not to defer to Congress. Their job is to examine Congress’ laws and make sure they’re constitutional. If they’re not, then the Court can strike them down. It’s that simple.

If the Court struck down Obamacare, it would not be an unprecedented step. In fact, it would be a step that has been happening for more than 200 years. Just because Congress passes a law with a strong majority doesn’t mean it’s automatically constitutional. If Congress and Obama passed a law that banned the ownership of firearms, it wouldn’t be constitutional. Even if every single member of Congress voted for it, it still wouldn’t be Constitutional. Get the picture? I hope you do, because our President certainly doesn’t.

Obama seems to think that the Judicial Branch should lay down at the feet of the majority. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, Mr. President, but judges are appointed, not elected, in order to avoid that very thing. I don’t want my Supreme Court justices bowing before what the people want. I want them making decisions based on what the law says. That’s what the Court was made to do, and as such, that’s what it ought to do.

Obama’s statement just affirms what conservatives already knew about him: he isn’t a big fan of the Constitution. Hopefully he’s defeated in November. That way, we may be able to preserve our Constitution. If he wins, I can’t promise that our rights will last another 4 years.