Pedro's Podium: To Preserve, Protect and Defend

It seems clearer to me why the legal system and our government is such a mess. With a Law Professor like Barak Obama teach Constitutional classes it brings a multitude of problems into focus. As a professor the responsibility should be to teach future lawyers not only about legal precedent, but the actual Constitution. It seems that every few of our institutions of higher learning are actually teaching the foundation of our government. But it seems that few of our elected—and for that matter unelected—official are aware of that document’s content. That was made very clear as Princess Pelosi has struggled to justify ObamaCare. In her latest attempt she could not cite the Constitution of the United States, but instead cited the Declaration of Independence. She might as well have cited the Articles of Confederation. Which absolutely never allowed such a power grab as the one attempted by the Progressives in the government.

Of course the Progressives are not concerned with preserving, protecting, or defending the Constitution. Mr. Obama sees our foundational document that defines our system of government and is suppose to preserve the liberty of the citizen, as an impediment to his ideas of a “perfect” union. The Socialist Progressives believe that they are meant to rule without impediments. The ideas that anyone can speak freely or defend themselves are frightening ideas.

The founders created a government with three equal branches.

Administrative: The Administrative Branch is supposed to, first and foremost, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution. The occupant of the office is also tasked with enforcing the laws passed by Congress and caring out those duties that protect the nation from all enemies, internal or external. There are other duties but they all relate to the preservation of the legally constituted republic, defined in our Constitution.

Legislative: Congress is supposed to, first and foremost, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution. They pass the laws that govern the nation. This also includes the preservation of the legally constituted republic, defined in our Constitution.

Judicial: The courts are supposed to, first and foremost, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution. They interpret the laws passed by Congress and signed into law by the President. This also includes the preservation of the legally constituted republic, defined in our Constitution. The Supreme Court was designed to be separate from the political system. The members were supposed to be unconcerned about the current political temperament and only concerned with the implementation and constitutionality of the laws.

Mr. Obama has accused the court of Activism activities. Well it seems that there are two different ideas of what defines activism in the courts.

Activist Courts Defined:
To Progressive—such as Nancy Pelosi and Emperor Obama—an “activist” court is any court that stands in the way of the implementation of their radical agenda. They believe that their power is unquestionable and that anyone who disagrees or impedes their “progress” in redefining their personal power is an enemy. It is easy to see with the open attacks and Obama’s enemy list that they don’t believe that anyone should be allowed to challenge their actions.

Please Support Our Sponsors

To conservatives the idea of an “activist” court is when a court exceeds its constitutional bounds by redefining or creating a new “right.” There have been cases in which “activist” courts have order governments to spend money on social programs or involving themselves in-state commercial activities—such as Wickard v. Filburn.

The most extreme case that many cite is Roe v. Wade, in which the Supreme Court somehow decided that the Constitution allowed the Federal government to overturn all state laws and establish a new “right.” Even though there is nothing remotely close to their conclusions outlined in the final judgment delivered in this case. This case is responsible for much of the division in the nation. Because the court determined law by straying away from the customary self-imposed limits usually adhered to by the judiciary, many Americans feel that this was the ultimate “activist” court decision.

The Case that keeps Progressives awake:
It has been repeated several times this week—in different venues—that the courts have the final say. Although that may be true, it does not mean that all decisions are final. I keep hearing Progressives saying that cases like Roe v. Wade are settled law. The only problem with such a statement is that is not really true. That case could be overturned. It has happened before, which sets precedence. The case of Plessy v. Ferguson must worry pro-abortion advocates awake at night. Well if they even know about it. Of course many Americans only know about Brown v. Board of Education. Brown v. Board of Education was the case that eliminated the idea of “separate but equal” which was defined in Plessy v. Ferguson. By revisiting this case the Supreme Court overturned a really bad decision and set forth the desegregation of the nation.

Mr. Obama’s recent attempts to either intimidate the high court or at the every least to undermine their authority, has crossed the line. His political posturing has no place in his dealing with an equal branch of government. It will be interesting to see if the high court takes any actions to reestablish their non-political status and defend the rule of law.

This is the second time he has attacked the Supreme Court. He has exceeded his authority as President. The courts are a separate branch and are not accountable to his whims and wishes. His open defiance of our constitutional system, once again, puts him in direct conflict with his oath of office. As he continues to change our government with executive orders, I can only hope to see more court intervention to halt this erosion of our republic and the liberties of all Americans.

For far too many years our elected representatives have spent their time attempting to circumvent the Constitution and not defending it. The power grabs have been too many and the abuses have gone on for too long. It is time for more actions that will once again restore individual liberties and curtail governmental abuses. It is time to replace the Progressives in every branch at every level, with those who will adhere to their oath, to preserve, protect, and defend our Constitution.