m**2
发帖数: 66 | 1 废话少说。对中国，对政治感兴趣，更应该跳出中国，多了解一下，比如说美国，无论
好与坏，他的制度到底是怎么运行的，和中国相比较优点缺点在哪里，再想想这是发生
在中国会怎样。
Wall Street Journal
Obama Warns Supreme Court Says Overturn of Health-Care Law Would Be '
Unprecedented, Extraordinary Step'
By LAURA MECKLER and CAROL E. LEE
President Barack Obama predicted Monday that the Supreme Court would uphold
his signature health-care law and said that overturning it would be a prime
example of judicial overreach.
President Obama said at a Rose Garden press conference he is "confident" the
Supreme Court will uphold his health-care reform law.
It was a rare instance of a president laying out his own arguments about a
Supreme Court case before the justices are set to reach their decision.
In his first public comments about the case since the justices took it up
last week, Mr. Obama appeared to be framing the political argument he would
make should he have to face voters this fall after a loss at the high court.
"For years, what we've heard is the biggest problem on the bench was
judicial activism or the lack of judicial restraint, that an unelected group
of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law," he
said at a news conference. The health-care case is a good example of just
that, he said. "And I'm pretty confident that this court will recognize that
and not take that step."
White House officials have said they were reluctant to appear to lobby the
Supreme Court, which is partly why the president didn't speak out on the
case until after it was argued before the court last week.
President Obama said the Supreme Court would uphold his health-care law in
remarks Monday in the Rose Garden.
Rather, the president's comments indicate how he might deal with the
political fallout should he lose, framing the court as a potential villain
that substitutes its judgment for that of elected legislators, and Americans
who lose benefits of the law as victims. Mr. Obama ticked off a string of
popular benefits that would disappear if the law is shot down, such as
barring insurers from discriminating against people with pre-existing
conditions.
Obama aides argue the election is likely to turn on the economy, but others
say a negative court decision would be a severe blow to his re-election.
Aggressive questions from several justices last week made it clear that the
law, or at least its central tenet, could be struck down.
But Mr. Obama, a former constitutional law professor, said he was confident
the high court would not take that step, partly because conservatives—who
are in the majority on the court—have long argued against what some refer
to as legislating from the bench. He noted that two conservative appellate
judges who heard the case found the law constitutional.
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R., Utah), among the first to argue that the mandate to
buy insurance was unconstitutional, responded, "It must be nice living in a
fantasy world where every law you like is constitutional and every Supreme
Court decision you don't is 'activist.'"
Mr. Obama said the court would take an "unprecedented, extraordinary step"
if it overturns the law because it was passed by "a strong majority of a
democratically elected Congress." The vote actually was close—it passed
with 60 votes in the Senate, just achieving the supermajority needed to
overcome a Republican filibuster, and by 219-212 in the House.
The Supreme Court sometimes overturns laws passed by Congress, as it did in
2010, when major parts of campaign-finance restrictions were nullified in
the Citizens United decision. It would be more unusual for the court to
strike down an entire law with hundreds of provisions over constitutional
problems with just one part.
The challengers' case against the Obama law centers on its provision
requiring most Americans to carry health insurance or pay a penalty. Several
conservative Supreme Court justices suggested at last week's arguments that
if the provision is found unconstitutional, the entire law must fall
because it would be too messy for the court to untangle which provisions
were connected to the insurance mandate. The Supreme Court ruling is
expected by the end of June.
Conservatives have long complained that liberals turned to the courts for
victories they couldn't win at the ballot box, deriding judges who overturn
popularly enacted laws as "judicial activists."
In this case, the president said, it was conservatives who were betting
Republican-appointed judges would nullify the legislative victory he and
fellow Democrats achieved after the 2008 elections.
Challengers, including 26 states and a small-business group, argue that
Congress has never required Americans to buy a product, in this case health
insurance. The Obama administration says Congress properly used its
authority over interstate commerce to regulate how consumers finance
something they are bound to require: health care.
The two conservative appellate judges who found the law constitutional were
Judge Lawrence Silberman in Washington, D.C., and Judge Jeffrey Sutton in
Cincinnati. "The right to be free from federal regulation is not absolute,
and yields to the imperative that Congress be free to forge national
solutions to national problems," Judge Silberman wrote last November. An
appellate court in Atlanta ruled against the insurance mandate, finding it "
breathtaking in its expansive scope."
Democrats have been trying for more than three years to make the case for
the mandate to buy insurance, and Mr. Obama tried again on Monday. He said
that without the mandate, it would be impossible to require insurance
companies to cover everybody, including those with pre-existing conditions,
at a reasonable price.
Sean Spicer, a spokesman for the Republican National Committee, said
Republicans would concede some provisions of the law were popular but argue
the Democrats went too far by imposing the insurance mandate.
James Simon, a professor at New York Law School, said, "I can't think of a
president anticipating a court decision as Mr. Obama has done and basically
arguing in favor" of his side. Mr. Simon, the author of several books on
conflicts between presidents and the court, said, "Jefferson was very angry
at the Marshall Court, but he [complained] in private," as did most other
presidents.
President Franklin Roosevelt "usually waited until they handed down a
decision" before fulminating against the court, Mr. Simon said, such as when
FDR blasted a 1935 ruling striking down portions of the National Industrial
Recovery Act.
Mr. Simon said he doubted the justices "are going to be influenced one way
or the other" by Mr. Obama's words.
A version of this article appeared April 3, 2012, on page A1 in some U.S.
editions of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: Obama Warns Supreme
Court. |
|
