President Obama’s contempt for the court

LA JOLLA, California — Since his election, President Obama ‘s relationship with the U.S. Supreme Court  has been one of defiance and antagonism. In his State of the Union address of 2010, he flatly insulted the Justices who came to honor him by their presence  . The TV picture clearly showed Justice Alito shaking his head and mumbling “not true” with his lips.

Recently, the president interfered in a case, still pending before the Court, that involved his administration as a defendant in a lawsuit brought by more than half the states, which claimed that  the health care law , commonly known as “Obamacare,” was unconstitutional. He astonishingly used condescending, even insulting, expressions like ” The Court must understand…” or “They [ Supreme Cout Justices] are non-elected people judging duly elected legislators.” He demanded “restraint” not “judicial activism,” terms he freely borrowed from the Conservative rhetoric and twisted their meaning. He asserted erroneously that it was “unprecedented” for the Supreme Court to overturn a law they find unconstitutional,” forgetting or ignoring that that’s what the Justices do for a living, and have been doing for centuries. He even gave false information when he claimed that  the law “passed by a strong majority” when the truth is that it passed by 219 against 212 .

This show of contempt by the Chief Executive for a co-equal branch of the U.S. government, the Judiciary, which is the most respected of the Three, is quite astounding, and …unprecedented. To be done by a president who was touted before the elections as a “professor of constitutional law” boggles the mind. (Recently it was uncovered that he was no “professor” but only a “lecturer,” non-tenured and with a temporary appointment.) But you don’t need to be a “professor of constitutional law.” Any literate person, average high-school student, or immigrant wishing to obtain US citizenship, knows that the Supreme Court , yes, may declare , and has declared,  laws to be  “unconstitutional .

It was so strange that the fifth Court of appeals demanded a letter from the Department of Justice clarifying and explaining what the President meant in his speech against the Supreme Court. This, I think, is also unprecedented.

The Ancient Hebrew Sages distinguished between the cognitive and intellectual capacities of people and classified them in four categories: 1) He knows and knows that he knows,  2) He knows and doesn’t know that he knows,   3) He doesn’t know and knows that he doesn’t know ,  and 4) He doesn’t know and  doesn’t know that he doesn’t know. All categories were given grades and characterized with an adjective. I really can’t figure out where to put our president, certainly not 2 or 3. The choice is between 1) which makes him “arrogant and narcissistic” and 2) which makes him “ignorant and totally out-of-touch.”

Both classifications do not bode well for the Republic. ” Ignorance” may be “bliss,” but not when you are President of the USA, in our crazy times, with our economic plight and a multitude of enemies seeking our demise.

I am still perplexed on why the Fourth Estate ,the so-called “free press,” which was designed by the Founding Fathers as practically the fourth branch of the government, continues to give a pass to this president rather than subjecting him , as with all his predecessors, to a rigorous and impartial vetting and accounting on what he says and does. The main stream media doesn’t even report facts that could be damaging to his re-election. For example, NBC reported on the “Fast and Furious” scandal only a few days ago, after a few months of hearings in Congress.

It is difficult to blame the people for not knowing the facts except to advise them to seek other sources of information.*
Yetiv is a lecturer and freelance writer based in La Jolla.  He may be contacted at isaac.yetiv@sdjewishworld.com