Here's what Obama's response to Judge Jerry Smith should be

[Hugabear]

For those of you who missed it: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304072004577323963402779268.html

A federal appeals-court judge's order requiring the Justice Department to affirm whether it thinks courts can overturn federal legislation stoked the partisan disagreement over the Obama administration's health-care law.

Tuesday's order by Judge Jerry Smith, a Reagan appointee on the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, came in response to comments a day earlier by President Barack Obama. Asked about the coming Supreme Court ruling on the constitutionality of his Affordable Care Act, Mr. Obama said on Monday that it would be "unprecedented" for "unelected" judges to overturn the law.
...
The judge asked Justice Department lawyer Dana Kaersvang whether the department recognized the authority of the courts to strike down federal statutes for constitutional reasons. Ms. Kaersvang told the judge that the department didn't question the longtime Marbury v. Madison precedent.

Nonetheless, the judge ordered her to deliver a response to his constitutional query by Thursday. He said the document should be at least three single-spaced pages and "make specific reference to the president's statements." The judge also made a reference to "ObamaCare," a term some critics use to refer to the law negatively.

Here is what Obama's reply should be:

Dear Honorable Judge Smith,

I do not need 3 pages to respond to your demands. I believe 3 words should be sufficient.

Go to Hell.

Sincerely,

President Obama

[liberalhistorian]

1. This judge is so far off bounds that

even Greta Van Susteren of FOX News, of all channels, called it appalling and said it was one of the most egregious abuses of legal power she'd seen , that the judge was way beyond the pale. She also said that the DOJ was under no obligation whatsoever to comply with such a demand and that it shouldn't. The question had already been asked and answered and that should have been that.

She's absolutely correct that the DOJ does NOT have to comply and that they should not do so. What utter and complete bullshit. I can imagine the wingnut uproar if it were the other way around.

[JayhawkSD]

2. So you're a fan of the theory of the Imperial Presidency, are you? n/t

[mrmpa]

4. Troll much these days?...........

that's exactly what your post indicates. The question is whether or not this judge has the right to have the DOJ respond to the President's remarks.

The judge does not. The DOJ is not the President's legal adviser. If the judge wants a response he should ask the President and his personal lawyers can then respond.

This is not about "Imperialistic" presidencies. This is about appointed judges going beyond their boundaries.

[leftynyc]

8. You newbies are a laugh riot

Unless you can show how you railed against all the pubs bitching nonstop about "unelected judges" like bush the junior or bitched about activist judges, you're nothing but a lying hypocrit. Hypocrisy is all the pubs have which is why they're going to get creamed in November. Now go away and get your talking points from the human sewer called rush. The President should tell that judge to go fuck himself.

[cherokeeprogressive]

3. Yessss.... Antagonize the Judicial Branch. That should go over like a fart in an elevator...

If you think

"Go to Hell

Sincerely,

President Obama"

is in any way presidential, you're way more imaginative than I.

[Hugabear]

10. It's better than Cheney's 'Fuck Off' comment

Do you think that Judge Smith requiring a '3-page, single-space' response as if he were giving a homework assignment is any less dignified?

[cherokeeprogressive]

16. Cheney's 'Fuck Off' comment? What is this? A game of "I know you are, but what am I?"

I'll never understand what makes people think "but... but... but... so-and-so did it too!" is a valid argument of any kind.

[Hugabear]

17. I did include "Your Honorable Judge Smith"

For the record, my OP was meant as a tongue-in-cheek suggestion. Sorry if I offended your sensibilities...

[Poll_Blind]

5. Here's the problem: Between now and November, Obama is going to be doing lots of this sort of thing.

Originally the campaign was centered around complaining about a do-nothing Congress. Not the shrewdest move, but politically it was almost certainly the safest. So he picks a fight with one of the other branches of government. Certainly not the first time that's happened.

But with the likelihood that the Supreme Court will strike down some or part of PPACA, that complicates things greatly for him. So he's got to tack on the Supreme Court to the list of things to point the finger at or when June rolls around he's not going to have any sort of defense, politically, from the fallout. So that's fight number two.

His re-election strategy is pivoting to include the Judicial branch. So now it's war with the other two branches of government.

This judge is an ass, but these kinds of responses shouldn't be unsurprising. I am very interested if, between now and November, any Supreme Court justice openly responds to what will likely be regular goading on Obama's part- especially as the release of the decision nears.

He's been painting himself into this corner for a while. I suppose it makes sense from the perspective he's in, now. It's going to be very interesting to see how this plays out in the Obama/Romney debates because making these accursations from the bully pulpit is one thing, but during the debate it's going to have to be approached with far more delicacy or he'll make another gaff like he did when he said the Supreme Court had never overturned federal laws like this.

This kind of thing is all part of the game he's playing. He'll win re-election if he can convince America that they're in one corner with him and the do-nothing Congress and the wicked Supreme Court is in the other.

PB

[Sherman A1]

6. I simply believe

that no response should be given. I believe it outside the purview of the judicial branch to assign homework to another equal branch of government over a statement made by one of it's members when there is nothing before that particular court that would require same. If there is a response at all I would root it in the First Amendment principle of Free Speech, in that the President like any other citizen is not restricted to think and say what he or she believes on any issue and even the court does not have the right under the Constitution (Marbury v Madison aside) to usurp that Right.

I believe a response at all establishes a dangerous precedent.

[dogknob]

7. "Nothing..."

"...plus the $20,000 for the gaming license, which I would appreciate if you'd put up yourself."

[libtodeath]

9. Cant judges be impeached for over stepping their roles

or do we have a country now where every judge can self appoint themself king?

[onenote]

11. Nope. The response was exactly what I hoped it would be.

A short, pointed dissertation on the fact that while the courts unequivocally have the power to strike down laws as unconstitutional, they should exercise that power with caution and with considerable deference to the legislative branch, particularly where the Commerce Clause is involved. The nice part is that the response declares that the letter isn't a supplemental brief, but then goes on to make the Administration's legal argument.

[Solomon]

12. Is there a link to the response. i was hoping that

they would ignore the judge. What could he do, hold them in contempt and lock them up?

[onenote]

13. You can get to it from this Huff Post

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/05/eric-holder-supreme-court-president-obama-health-care-case_n_1405606.html

[meow2u3]

14. Why did Judge Smith think he had a right to give such a court order?

Last I checked, the White House is in the District of Columbia, not Mississippi, Lousiana, or Texas. The Fifth Circus doesn't have jurisdiction over DC, unless they think they moved it to Bush's former pig farm in Crawford, TX.

[abynorml]

15. Response to Judge Smith

My first thought for President Obama's response to Judge Smith,when I heard about it, was also three words:

"Go Fuck Yourself!"