Washington (CNN) - Attorney General Eric Holder made clear Thursday that the Obama administration recognizes the authority of federal courts, including the Supreme Court, to rule on whether the 2010 health care reform law or any other laws passed by Congress are constitutional.
The declaration by Holder came in a letter to a federal appeal's court that had ordered the government to respond by Thursday in a legal and political spat over the health care law championed by President Barack Obama.
I guess the President's remarks hit a little too close to home. The reaction and ensuing letter from these conservative judges is unprecedented. The next move will probably come from Demint or Issa for impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanors.
Glad to see the Obama and his administration is setting an example that the courts, the law should be respected.Hopefully, others will follow in this example.
A hit dog will holler is what they say down south. Now theses so called "activist judges are screaming." Man the truth hurts.
Wow, there is no winning with Democrats, the President and his administration are setting a good example for all of us that the law, the courts should be respected, he's recognizing that we have courts, laws, a process of doing things for a reason which is what makes the USA a great country, it keeps the USA from becoming another Venezuela, Cuba, China, Russia, Iran, etc...and Democrats have completely missed the important example Obama has set for us and other generations. Democrats are so busy fighting with Republicans, GOP that they miss something this good. Amazing! Seems to me Democrats just like fighting.
Shouldn't the court of appeals deal only with the arguments in the case? I am so tired of republican and Fox talking points being regurgitated by right wingnut judges.
When an appeals court judge or a supreme court judge uses the term "obamacare" when referring to ACA, his decision is going to be purely political.
Justices appearing and speaking at "conservative" meetings?
Justices wives with financial interest in the repeal of ACA and said justice "forgetting" he had to note her income and from where?
Even Blind Lady Justice could see it...
Anything but a 9-0 decision is politics from the "supremes".
he was referring to, of course, Obamacare - to what he termed broad consensus in majorities in both houses of Congress," Smith said.
The "goose" has complied, it is now the "gander's turn:
Judge Smith is hereby ordered to draft a 5 page, single-spaced dissertation on the appropriateness of a Circuit Court Judge involved in this non-issue brouhaha using the distinctly partisan misnomer Obamacare instead of addressing the law by its' legal name Affordable Care Act. Additionally Judge Smith is hereby required to explain ad nauseum the impact that said lack of impartiality might have on his decision and that of his fellow judges. Lastly, Judge Smith is asked to explore any and all alternatives to hi recusing himself from any further involvement in the b.s useless legal and partisan maneuver by a bunch of old turds that evidently have nothing better to do than start crap where ther is none.
Someone should file a complaint against those judges. They were unprofessional and partisan. They should also be recused based on their failure to appear impartial.
Are these the "activist" judges Newt is talking about when he says he would send the US Marshalls or Capitol
Police to arrest tgem? Of course not-– they are working for the Tea Party.
A waste of government and judicial resources. If the Court of Appeals does not understand the 210 year old precedent of Marbury vs. Madison, maybe it is time to resign and go work for the Heritage Foundation or some other conservative special interest group. I hope that in the case before the Supreme Court Justice? Scalia explains why he did not think that it was realistic to read the law he will vote against. America should be very scared of what this group of "conservatives:" is doing to this country.
Stop the Charade - A waste of government and judicial resources. If the Court of Appeals does not understand the 210 year old precedent of Marbury vs. Madison
The Courts clearly do but Obama's words indicate he does not and he leads one entire branch of our government. He needs to come clean on exactly what he believes and put it on paper. His words indicate he does not believe the US Supreme Court has the power to rule Obamacares individual mandate unconstitutional.
Kudos to the Obama administration for having the respectful willingness to work with both sides.
The same unfortunately cannot be said of this partisan judge, who appeared to let go of his impartiality when he used the right-wing rhetoric "Obamacare" in his order. An interesting detail left off here.
The fact that last week, Conservative judges were sounding off against the healthcare law, almost reading from the heritage club playbook is a joke. Finally, Obama is pushing back.
Saw this on MSNBC last night, really? are you kidding me. They want respect? then tell me why this judge used the term Obamacare (a FOX original), I thought they were suppose to be impartial but using the term obamacare and having the DOJ write a 3 page letter just proves again how hateful these conservatives are; and don't for one minute believe this is about anything other than making the president look bad. How much more juvenile can they get?