from another thread
I don't recall you speaking up when Obama launched the most brutal attack on the federal judiciary since FDR's attack on the "Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse"
flashback to the 2010 State of the Union
transcript
that was outrageous, unprecedented, and totally inappropriate. I can't remember a president attacking SCOTUS in a State of the Union speech before or since
six of the nine justices were sitting silently in the House of Representatives when obama launched his attack on them, telling the nation:
“With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections. I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people. And I’d urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to correct some of these problems.”
As Democrats leapt to their feet in applause. Justice Samuel Alito mouthed the words, “Not true” — and never attended another State of the Union address.
And Chief Justice Roberts said and did nothing to defend the Court from Obama’s unprecedented assault on its independence.
And then there was April 2012, when oral arguments in the Obamacare case (NFIB v. Sebelius) appeared to go against the administration, Obama warned SCOTUS against overturning the law, attacking the very idea that “an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law.” WOW.
And Chief Justice Roberts said and did nothing to defend the Court from Obama’s unprecedented assault on its independence.
In fact, Roberts voted to save Obamacare, joining the 4 liberals to craft a 5-4 majority, and there has been speculation that Roberts reversed his original vote, from against Obamacare to in favor of Obamacare, when he found out that the other swing vote (Kennedy) was voting against. WOW.
If you want to attack a President for "viciously attacking the independent judiciary," then attack the President who actually did viciously attack the independent judiciary, which would be Obama
FDR was attempting to bring socialism to the US under the pretext of remedies for the Great Depression. Up until then, it was more or less agreed that the Federal Government was limited by the enumeration of its powers in the Constitution. The Tenth Amendment reads,
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people,
and on this basis, the Court struck down most of the New Deal legislation
FDR was apoplectic, and the Dems referred to 4 of the justices caustically as The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.
FDR's "solution" was a court-packing plan: the Constitution established the Supreme Court, but didn't specify the number of judges, so FDR's plan was to appoint a whole bunch of additional judges. His argument was that some of the justices were long in the tooth and no longer up to the job, so he would appoint a shadow judge for each of the older judges then and there, rather than waiting until the existing judges retired or died. Fortunately, Congress refused to go along with it, but also the Court backed down in the face of FDR's bullying and passed the legislation. That was the start of the abuse of the commerce clause (Congress shall have power "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.")
Fast-forward to the present time, and the Dems are offering up another court-packing scheme. President Trump has appointed 2 justices, so the Dems are arguing that the next Dem president should increase the size of the Court by 2, from 9 to 11, enabling 2 immediate appointments.
What Obama did and what FDR did and what the Dems propose is far worse than anything that has happened to the judiciary in Poland