Dean_L of the terrific Nonsensible Shoes, makes an interesting observation.
President Obama won’t defend the Defense of Marriage Act, which is still the law of the land because, as Newsmax notes,Obama Attorney General Eric Holder said on Wednesday that the administration will not defend the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act in the courts, which has banned recognition of same-sex marriage for 15 years. President Clinton signed the act into law in 1996.Yet, President Obama will push forward with his health care law that has been deemed unconstitutional by more than one judge because (USA Today),“We don’t believe this kind of judicial activism will be upheld, and we are confident that the (law) will ultimately be declared constitutional by the courts,” Stephanie Cutter, deputy senior adviser to President Obama, wrote on the White House blog.Is anyone else doing an Obama double take over this?
Yes, I stole Dean’s entire post. It was too good to leave on the cutting room floor.
Also, I kinda suck. Sorry.
One thing that really aggravates me about Obama, and the Left in general, is just how arbitrary they are when it comes to the enforcing the law and upholding the Constitution.
Don’t get it twisted. I’m not talking about priorities. Every administration prioritizes. After 9/11, George Bush was understandably concerned about international terrorism. His Department of Justice naturally followed suit and pursued international terrorists. Even Bill Clinton’s DOJ could be said to have priorities. Just ask Monica Lewinsky, Vince Foster and David Koresh.
No, I’m talking about the la-di-da/make-it-up-as-we-go-along nature of the Obama Admenstruation. What was that you say? There was a well-documented case of voter intimidation involving the New Black Panthers that Team Bambi could’ve prosecuted? Nope, no can do. Eric Holder was too busy haughtily lecturing America about race relations to, you know, do his job.
It’s that kind of ridiculous garbage, where it’s so blatantly obvious only a trained leftist smart-tard could fail to see it, that completely erodes any faith in Obamster’s ability to administer justice in any way that even sorta resembles fairness. Combine that with his public declarations against DOMA and for the blatantly unconstitutional ObamaCare and one gets the feeling that these clowns really have no clue what the hell they’re doing.
Or maybe the libs really do have a plan, and we’re just too hung up in the individual cases to see it. Think about how liberals view the US Constitution. From penumbras to using foreign statutes to interpret American laws, the Left is constantly dreaming of new ways to subvert the founding governmental document of our nation.
Now a lot of conservatives examine and analyze these liberal law tricks because they seek to understand the rationales behind them. That’s a perfectly understandable reaction. It’s puzzling how a case like Griswold v. Connecticut got ruled the way it did. It’s easy to see why that sort of mystery would get folks into Dr. House mode attempting to diagnose the disease.
The problem is that after a while, the habit of conservatives trying to figure out progressive constitutional interpretation is fucking stupid and pointless. Why? Because there is no real logic to the jurisprudence of Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg or pretty much the entire 9th Circuit. Oh sure, they’ll dress up their arguments in lots of loopy Latinized legal yakkety-yak. But that’s just the window-dressing for the true-believer nitwits and the useful idiots in progressive movement.
No, the real raison d’être for liberal law interpretation is: “To Use Whatever Nonsense We Can To Get Whatever Lefty Agenda Item We Want.”
You’ll notice that whenever the Left wants something to be done–no prayer in public schools, legalized abortion, gay marriage, whatever–there is always a population of judges, lawyers and legal scholars ready to pore over the Constitution to find an amendment or clause that can be tortured into getting them just what they want. Seemingly, the more unrelated the bit of the Constitution that they’re interpreting is to the case involved, the better. Whether they use penumbras, foreign law or just plain old bullshit is of no consequence. As long as Jeeebus McChristDude is out of the classroom, babies can be scraped at any moment in utero and two dudes can enter into state-sanctioned holy matrimony, it’s all good in the hood.
The Left’s idea of the purpose of laws is not justice or fairness or a reflection of the will of the citizenry. If that was the case, most of the liberal agenda would have little chance of surviving. The progressive movement looks at the law as a means of impressing it’s ideology on the country. The Supreme Court, the circuit courts and the Justice Department of a socialist president are all fine tools for the committed American Left to complete their tasks.
That’s why Obama can on one hand ignore the Judge Vinson’s ruling characterizing ObamaCare as unconstitutional while on the other unilaterally declare the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional. It has nothing to do with any coherent logic or structural understanding of the law. It has everything to do with the progressive movement using whatever club it can to get what it wants.