How the Supreme Court’s Previous Rulings on Obama’s Executive Action Over Reaches will Inform the Upcoming ObamaCare Supreme Court Case
Finally, someone in the media has a creative, clear and accurate judicial analysis of how Obama’s repeated executive actions have undermined his chances in the upcoming ObamaCare Supreme Court case, how Obama and his presidency has come to be viewed by the Supreme Court justices — and their repeated smack down of Obama’s over-reach on his assertion of executive power.
Of course, Business Week has a limp and largely pathetic regurgitation of every liberal’s talking points, and Greg Stohr manages to be patronizing and hand-wringing at the same time, which is tough to pull off.
But when the Supreme Court keeps ruling against Obama’s executive over-reach (and they have, see LA Times above) including, at times, unanimously, it will be these precedents that informs their ObamaCare decision.
President Obama is a repeat-offender on executive order over-reach, as already defined and judged by the Supreme Court.
Repeat offenders are viewed as much by their past actions as by their current reason to appear before the court, and if journalists like Greg Stohr can not understand this, or refuse to understand it, they are likely in for a very rude awakening on judgment day.
Any first law school student will tell you that Obama’s assertions about the what the text of the law is meant to mean, as opposed to what it says — will be weighed in the previous conclusions that the Court has made against the President — but to Greg Stohr, it is merely more convenient to ignore these facts, this history.
But if I were to speculate, I’d say the thing that likely rings in Chief Justices Robert’s ears are the Democrats who lamented Robert’s decision, who told him they had been hoping that he would have put the Democratic party out their bleeding-chest-wound ObamaCare political misery, without their fingerprints. (The fact that the Dems have lost both the House and Senate since passing ObamaCare, and that 30, that is half of the Dem Senators who voted for ObamaCare, are no longer Senators is hard to ignore, but Stohr did.)
Imagine being one of the thirty Dem Senators left who voted for ObamaCare — do they scream, “President Obama, Give me back my Senators!” much like the Roman cry of “Quintilius Varus, give me back my legions!”
(Oh, that’s what Senator Schumer was doing last week.)
Stohr and his ilk conveniently forget other key points, specifically that Senator Nelson refused to vote for ObamaCare unless States were allowed to run the exchanges — this change in the law the left insists was not part of the intent, was necessary for it to get 60 votes in the Senate. There can be no greater expression of intent than a provision put in the bill so it would pass.