And well he should! I mean, the damned thing was written over a 100 years ago by lots of very very white men long since very very dead. Why should they be allowed to constrain progress!
In an interview regarding Obamacare, Acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal complained about the power of the Supreme Court to declare it unconstitutional:
“If the Supreme Court struck this down, I think that it wouldn’t just be about health care. It would be the Supreme Court saying: ‘Look, we’ve got the power to really take decisions, move them off of the table of the American people, even in a democracy.”
[…]
Katyal then complained that the Supreme Court might use its power to subvert The Will Of The People by striking down Obamacare:
“The challengers are saying that this law is unconstitutional, which means even if 95 percent of Americans want this law, they can’t have it.”
Let’s face it. All this BS about individual liberty and unalienable rights significantly hinders government from controlling us the way government is entitled to control us. And that’s just not fair to government. Plus, the founders and framers left us with a representative republic rather than a mob-rules straight democracy. Which hinders those whose political ideology relies on manufactured consent.
So it’s probably best if we just start ignoring the Constitution. After all, only by ignoring what it says can we make it live again!
WHY DO SUPREME COURT JUSTICES (AND CONSERVATIVES, AND LIBERTARIANS, AND CLASSICAL LIBERALS) WANT A DEAD CONSTITUTION?
Heh. Of course there’s a problem with the Constitution and SCOTUS interfering in such matters, Jeff. That’s for Obama to decide through use of presidential decrees!
“The challengers are saying that this law is unconstitutional, which means even if 95 percent of Americans want this law, they can’t have it.”
So he/she wouldn’t have a beef if the voters decided to flay then draw and quarter people named “Neal Katyal”?
I think Whoopi would call them white white men. Can you imagine her saying that George Zimmerman isn’t really white white.
Tyranny of the majority, separation of powers, limited government, enumerated powers, all bourgeois truths.
Wonder where that 95% criteria came from?
Please correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t a lot of federal officers swear to abide by and uphold the Constitution?
It’s a contract, Neal. You don’t uphold your end of the bargain and live by the restrictions in the document, then we’re sure as Hell not going to abide by our end of things. Consent of the governed, and all that.
From what I’ve picked up so far, what’s really disconcerting to the left is that it’s been their ‘own’- such as Ginsberg- giving them the most grief. Seems nobodies buying the “it’s a tax” argument.
Surely I can’t be the only one who thinks Mr. Katyal’s argument is the Con Law equivalent of the sleezy defense attorney lamenting the fact that the judge might sentence his client to death for murdering his parents because that would mean the state would be executing an orphan.
The really funny thing abou the “it’s a tax” logic is that it is about as regressive a tax as you can imagine being argued by progressives.
One other thing, I think of this now as the Schrodinger mandate. It’s both a tax and not a tax until we open the box and look at it. Strangely, the closer we look at it the more difficult it becomes to ascertain its actual position.
Funny. The Solicitor General’s President doesn’t think Congress has any business determining policy either! Which leaves who? Uh, I dunno, the Queen of England, maybe?
[smacks forehead]
All it takes for liberty to fail is for imbeciles to be promoted to Solicitor General.
From the interview: “It’s rare for a president’s signature initiative to come before the Supreme Court and be challenged as unconstitutional.”
Well, Neal, it used to be rare that a president and his Congressional lackeys would conspire to make an unconstitutional power grab the centerpiece of their policy platform. This bit I like better:
“…there’s a lot of people who can be worried about that and who, if they don’t like the law, should vote against those who voted for it. Vote against President Obama, or vote against the members of Congress.”
We made a hell of a good start in 2010, Neal, but thanks ever so much for helping us with our 2012 campaign commercials.
Katyal was Kagan’s point person for the ere se of ObamaCare.
What’s really funny Squid is that the proggs are normally content to let the courts take the lead, since judges are usually so far ahead of us unenlightened retrograde troglodytic bitter clingers whose biases politicans ignore at their own peril.
Does anyone suppose that, given a SCOTUS appointment, dear Neal would decline because he doesn’t believe in that sort of thing?
Didn’t think so.
Lost in all of his fantasizing about the wonders of liberalism, Mr. Katayal failed to read the latest CBS poll, which has only 36% of the folks in favor of the law. So actually, when a majority really doesn’t want something that’s been forced on them, they find ways to get rid of it.
Mr Katyal makes the poll results. He doesn’t read them.
It’s the Obama corollary to the Pelosi Uncertainty Principle in action.
Then it’s probably a good thing that the actual figures are a lot closer to the other way around.
Like Roe v. Wade took state regulation of abortion “off the table,” Neal? Not so bothered by that, are you?
If 95% of the American people want it, amending the Constitution to allow it would be a breeze, wouldn’t it, Neal?
Amendments take to long. And sometimes The People support amendments that are themselves unconstitutional
Like in California, for instance.
I mean, the damned thing was written over a 100 years ago by lots of very very white men long since very very dead.
I only wish they felt the same way about Das Kapital.
Get real, mongo. Das Kapital is the TRVTH the USC is just some musty old document.
So he/she wouldn’t have a beef if the voters decided to flay then draw and quarter people named “Neal Katyal”?
Nancy Pelosi phones to ask “Are you serious? Are you serious?”
If Pelosi phoned me, well, let’s just say I’d likely commit a number of acts in violation of various acts regulating interstate phone communication.
Ernst – I’m sure the homosexual marriage decision outraged Ol’ Neal no end.
the damned thing was written over a 100 years ago by lots of very very white men long since very very dead.
And you know what else? Those (now) dead guys wore wigs during the process.
Oh, not in any sort of sassy or transgendered sort of way. No they wore them in a very conformist and normal sort of way. Creeps.
Practically fascist actually.
Wigs AND knee-breeches!
And stockings!
And not a ZIPPER anywhere.
The entire aesthetic reeks of fascism
and probably B.O.
I wonder if we could get enough popular support for a constitutional amendment barring lawyers from serving in any capacity of government except for the judiciary?
I bet it would solve lots of problems.
Why should judges be required to be lawyers?
If it’s not necessary for a SCOTUS justice why set a higher bar for anyone else?
You guys should develop an act.
Lee: Only judges should be lawyers in government.
Thomas: Not sure we should even extend that to judges.
Good times.
I kind of like the idea of lawyers as chattel.
Works for me, McGehee. Lord knows you could stack them like cordwood, I’m not sure they’d burn that well though.
Hey, leigh, lawyers need some lovin’, too!
Yep, awake from my nap and a couple of pounds lighter. We’ll see if my comments are less bilious.
Oops! Boy, is my face red, Red! I figured you were still dreaming sweet stoned dreams.
Anyway, you’re an Outlaw, so lawyer or no, you’re exempted.
Thanks, leigh. Even the New American Republic is going to need one or two attys to help draft its Constitution. Which, by the way, would require the same long drawn-out process to amend as our current one. Gotta make sure those 95% aren’t disenfranchised.
When do they send you home, Red? Or did they make you check out by noon like a hotel?
First thing in the a.m., leigh. Wanted to get one more round of fine dining, pharmaceutical-grade drugs and admiration of the young women in the nursing field. Life is good.
Some people just don’t get complex zero-sum games with modifiable rule sets.
This guy is one such.