If the liberties of America are ever compleatly ruined, of which in my opinion there is now the utmost danger, it will in all probability be the consequence of a mistaken notion of prudence, which leads men to acquiesce in measures of the most destructive tendency for the sake of present ease. — Samuel Adams, 1771, Boston Gazette under the pseudonym Candidus

Obama Clan Poised for War Against Constitution, SCOTUS

March 30, 2012   ·   By   ·   0 Comments

Even if the individual mandate included within Obamacare is overturned, the administration and its leftist allies stand poised to undermine the legitimacy of the U.S. Supreme Court and the Constitution itself. This effort began in earnest with a front page hit piece on the New York Times that ran July 24 of last year. Reporter Adam Liptek claimed that under Chief Justice John Roberts the court is more conservative now than it has been in decades.

The article is built around a database created by the National Science Foundation (NSF) that gauges the ideological complexion of court rulings and the leanings of individual members. “In the database, votes favoring criminal defendants, unions, people claiming discrimination or violation of their civil rights are, for instance, said to be liberal,” the report explains. “Decisions striking down economic regulations and favoring prosecutors, employers and the government are said to be conservative.”

But the perspective here is a bit skewed. For starters, it is misleading to conflate decisions that overrule precedent with some form of activism. Contrary to what is often taught in law schools, the actual U.S. Constitution and what is known as U.S. constitutional law are often two very different items. Recent court rulings that overturn earlier decisions divorced from the text’s original meaning are more about restoration and less about activism. Moreover, Liptak places far too much weight and faith in Justice Anthony Kennedy as a reliable constitutional vote.

Another key episode here concerns President Obama’s attack on the U.S. Supreme Court included as part of his 2010 State of the Union Address. Here Obama disparaged the majority’s pro-First Amendment ruling in the Citizens United decision. Not since Franklin Delano Roosevelt sought to pack the court has there ever been such an overt assault on the judiciary.

Former Attorney General Edwin Meese, as always, has a keen understanding of what President Obama, and leftist pressure groups, are up to.

“What he [Obama] is really doing is leading an effort to undermine the Constitution as the primary document which forms the basic principles of our government and the structure that should be followed by the executive branches as well as the other two branches,” Meese explained during a talk at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). The former AG also said that a recent New York Times article also written by Liptak, which demeans the Constitution, was also deliberately timed with certain actions undertaken by the Obama Administration.

“The Constitution has seen better days,” the article begins.

From here, Liptak goes on to describe how the Constitution is no longer a compelling model for other countries. He even quotes sitting U.S. Supreme Court Association Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to drive the point home.

“I would not look to the United States Constitution if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012,” she said. As an alternative, Ginsburg recommends looking to South Africa’s constitution, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, or the European Convention on Human Rights.

Justice Ginsburg’s attack on the validity of the U.S. Constitution came under fire in an article by Americans for Limited Government’s Mark Wohlschlegel who pointed out that, “Madam Justice Ginsburg either is ignorant or chooses to willfully overlook the very fundamental purpose the U.S. Constitution was created for — it is not a document designed to empower the government to protect its people, but rather one that was designed to protects its people from their government. That bears repeating — the Constitution was designed to protect the American people from their government.”

Wohlschlegel underscores the real danger in the politically motivated attacks on the Roberts Court. At their core, they are designed to undermine the very document that protects individual freedom and limits federal government power by delegitimizing the Court which is specifically created to protect those liberties.

Keep this in mind, when you hear and read warnings from the left and their sycophants in the media about a dangerous turn of the Court. The shots across the bow have been fired in the New York Times, expect the drumbeat to intensify as the Supreme Court nears a decision on the fate of Obamacare.


This article is printed with the permission of the author(s). Opinions expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the article’s author(s), or of the person(s) or organization(s) quoted therein, and do not necessarily represent those of American Clarion or Dakota Voice LLC.

Comment Rules: Please confine comments to salient ones that add to the topic; Profanity is not allowed and will be deleted; Spam, copied statements and other material not comprised of the reader’s own opinion will be deleted.


Similar Posts:

Kevin Mooney is a contributing editor to Americans for Limited Government. Americans for Limited Government is dedicated to putting the principles of limited government into action. They work with local groups across the nation to promote freedom, limited government, and the principles of the U.S. Constitution. Their goal is to harness the power of American citizens and grassroots groups in order to put the people back in charge in states across the country.
Kevin Mooney
View all articles by Kevin Mooney
Leave a comment with your Facebook login
Print Friendly

Readers Comments (0)


Sorry, comments are closed on this post.

Featured Articles

California_EBT

Food Stamps for Cash

Robert Romano

Perhaps the foolish ones are those who keep working. As it turns out, many federal and state-based welfare programs, including the federally funded $17.3 billion a year Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), legally allow for cash withdrawals from ATMs and cash back options at grocery stores and elsewhere.

Peroutka_Nevada

Alice in Wonderland in Nevada

Michael Peroutka

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said in a rather scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice (remember Alice in Wonderland), “whether you can make words mean different things.” “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “who is to be master – that is all.” Perhaps Alice can give us some insight into what the government is doing right now in Bunkerville, Nevada.

debate

Trying To Win The Debate…By Pretending There Isn’t One

David Mann

Whenever someone tries to sell an idea as being “settled science,” or as being completely agreed upon and noncontroversial among all “experts,” “reputable researchers,” “intelligent people,” etc., that’s a big, red, flashing light telling you that you need to question it -- and question it carefully. Legitimate claims don't need to hide behind that kind of hype.

Bible_Easter

Palm Sunday and the Den of Thieves

David Whitney

Palm Sunday is a glorious Sunday, when we recall that triumphal entry of Jesus into the city of Jerusalem. At that momentous point, the people recognize that Jesus is the Messiah, the King that was long promised in the writings of the prophets. As I was studying Luke’s account of Palm Sunday this week it struck me just how different that day was for Jesus in contrast with the crowd rejoicing about Him.

Two homosexual Jews kissing, one holding a sign which says "Privacy is a civil right." Photo Credit: Nathan Mac

Deception: Christian Publisher Sells Soul for Mammon

J. Matt Barber

WaterBrook Multnomah Publishing Group is planning to release, through its liberal sister imprint Convergent Books, a manuscript paradoxically titled God and the Gay Christian: The Biblical Case in Support of Same-Sex Relationships. Is the Christian world about to suffer through another World Vision moment?

Archives




"We don't intend to turn the Republican Party over to the traitors in the battle just ended. We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support. Turning the party over to the so-called moderates wouldn't make any sense at all." - Ronald Reagan, Nov. 10, 1964