Obama’s Political Constitution
He only talks about it when it helps him, and even then, he’s not correct.
Barack Obama only talks about the Constitution when it helps him politically, and even then, he’s not correct. On Thursday, Obama paid a visit to the University of Chicago — the place where he lectured on constitutional law — though no word on whether he visited his old benefactor William Ayers. Obama lamented that Senate Republicans are cheapening the power of the Supreme Court by refusing to hold nomination hearings for his nominee, Merrick Garland.
“The courts will be just an extension of our legislatures and our elections and our politics,” Obama warned. “And that erodes the institutional integrity of the judicial branch.” Yes, Supreme Court justices are nominated through a political process by a president and a Senate that both swear to uphold the Constitution. Time and time again, however, the courts have held Obama’s executive actions as unconstitutional.
Clearly, in those years teaching constitutional law, Obama didn’t learn much. And it’s most certainly demonstrable that the Senate cannot trust him to pick the justice to replace the grand originalist, the late Antonin Scalia. While Obama lectures with faux intellectualism, the Senate based its decision to not hold nomination hearings for Obama’s pick on precedent set by Democrats.
However, senators — some Democrats and Republicans Mark Kirk and Lindsey Graham — all said they would or have sat down with Judge Garland to meet one-on-one. In Graham’s instance, his office said Graham stands with the rest of the GOP in opposing a nomination process, but he still met with the nominee as a “courtesy.”
Meanwhile, Obama touted his record of nominating minorities and people in the LGBT community to benches across the nation. “Yeah, he’s a white guy,” Obama said of Garland. “But he’s a really outstanding jurist.” The key word there was “but.” To him, it’s all about legacy and getting his way.
Start a conversation using these share links: