So, Obama was a “Constitutional Law Professor”, was he?

Barack Obama, while doing a fundraiser in 2007 claimed, “I was a constitutional law professor, which means unlike the current president I actually respect the Constitution…”

Yet this constitutional law professor establishes the following as his criteria for selecting judges:

“We need somebody who’s got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it’s like to be a young teenage mom,” Obama told a Planned Parenthood conference in Washington, D.C., in 2007 “The empathy to understand what it’s like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old. And that’s the criteria by which I’m going to be selecting my judges.”

Of Justice Alito, Obama once said:

“I’ve seen an extraordinarily consistent attitude on the part of Judge Alito that does not uphold the traditional role of the Supreme Court as a bastion of equality and justice for United States citizens.”

A constitutional law professor should, one would think, understand the role of the federal judiciary. As should be apparent to anyone with a clue, and I don’t include Senator Obama in that particular group, what he is claiming isn’t anywhere close to the traditional role of the federal judiciary. What he is advocating is legislation from the bench based on emotion and empathy, not the Constitution.

Here, in plain English, is the role, of the federal judiciary found in an introduction to the US Federal Court System for Judges and Judicial Administrators in Other Countries. It may be something a particular constitutional lawyer may wish to avail himself of:

The federal judiciary is a totally separate, selfgoverning branch of the government. The federal courts often are called the guardians of the Constitution because their rulings protect the rights and liberties guaranteed by the Constitution. Through fair and impartial judgments, they determine facts and interpret the law to resolve legal disputes.

The courts do not make the laws. That is the responsibility of the Congress. Nor do the courts have the power to enforce the laws. That is the role of the President and the many executive branch departments and agencies. But the judicial branch has the authority to interpret and decide the constitutionality of federal laws and to resolve other disputes over federal laws.

Not a thing in that brief description approaches the Obama criteria for federal judges.

And folks, given the fact he may win this election, that should scare you half to death.

Permalinks


Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!

Send this to a friend