WASHINGTON, Feb. 4, 2016 – At a campaign event in Deocorah, Iowa, this week, Hillary Clinton was asked if she would consider appointing President Obama to the Supreme Court if she becomes president.
Yet, when questioned at a recent campaign event in Clinton nearly erupted in giggling excitement as she responded to the question from the audience, saying, “Wow, what a great idea. No one has ever suggested that to me, I love that, wow,” the Democrat presidential candidate responded. “He may have a few other things to do but I tell you that’s a great idea,” reported ABC News.
For conservatives the very notion of having a Justice Barack Obama glaring over cases involving right to life, Christian rights, Sanctuary Cities or even illegal immigrants’ receiving more protection and benefits is anathema.
For conservatives, Constitutionalists, pro-life supporters and illegal immigration border protection advocates Clinton’s response had to be more than enough reason to become even more galvanized against her presidential run.
Obama has insisted that he regards the U.S. Constitution to be flawed and admitted as much during a Sept. 6, 2001, Chicago WBEZ-FM panel discussion.
The former constitutional college lecturer pattern and practice as commander in chief has escalated to the point that the U.S. Constitution sometimes seems to be little more than a relic from the past and that he finds it an unnecessary handcuff on his presidential intentions and power.
Two times Obama took the presidential oath of office and stated, “I do solemnly swear, or affirm, that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and I will to the best of my ability preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
Each time the harsh reality appeared to be a sworn oath that was uttered with little more than a passing indulgence for the ceremony’s sake. Both terms of office the sitting president that Clinton would consider as a Supreme Court justice have been the playground of dismemberment of the Constitution.
He has given misappropriation of executive authority a whole new meaning.
Consider how the president has expanded the sheer scope of executive authority to issue presidential orders to grant illegal protections to over 5 million illegal immigrants as he did in 2014. Consider the fact that he has been a relentless opponent of the Second Amendment and even announced measures to marginalize the Second Amendment gun rights.
Then, of course, there was his total refusal in 2011 to uphold his duty and responsibility as president to enforce the law by enforcing the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). In effect he was declaring to the American people that a law passed by Congress would no longer be enforced, which in effect put him above the U.S. Constitutional obligations he swore to uphold.
This type of acknowledgment by a president would make Obama a far more onerous Supreme Court justice. The law does matter, and the interpretation of the law by a sitting Supreme Court Justice Obama who has already shown open scorn for the U.S. Constitution would be disastrous.
The other reality of course centers on the fact that if Clinton becomes president and an opening on the Supreme Court occurs, if she nominates Obama, his nomination would hit a solid Republican-controlled Senate wall of opposition.
Second, he would have to recuse himself from so many cases, like any discussion on the Affordable Health Care act, if he made it to the SCOTUS bench, he might as well spend most of his time on the golf course.
When former Secretary of State Clinton exclaimed with open glee, “Wow, what a great idea,” America should be shaking in the boots that will take them to voting booths where they have the power to block Clinton’s White House aspirations on Election Day.Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2016 Communities Digital News
• The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the editors or management of Communities Digital News.
This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities Digital News, LLC. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.
Correspondingly, Communities Digital News, LLC uses its best efforts to operate in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine under US Copyright Law and always tries to provide proper attribution. If you have reason to believe that any written material or image has been innocently infringed, please bring it to the immediate attention of CDN via the e-mail address or phone number listed on the Contact page so that it can be resolved expeditiously.