NBC Accuses Federal Judge of Bringing Politics Into Courtroom By Questioning Obama
On Wednesday's NBC Nightly News, anchor Brian Williams accused a federal judge of bringing politics into the judicial process simply by ordering the Justice Department to explain controversial comments President Obama made against the Supreme Court: "Politics are ideally supposed to stay out of the nation's courtrooms, but that's not what happened this week in a federal courtroom in Texas."
In report that followed, correspondent Pete Williams proclaimed: "The political controversy spilled into a Texas federal court, where the rules are designed to filter out politics, interrupting arguments about a challenge to part of the Obama health care law." Williams noted how Judge Jerry Smith "put a Justice Department lawyer on the spot" to explain the President's attack on the court system and made sure to point out that Smith was "a Reagan appointee."
Williams explained: "On Monday, asked about predictions that the Supreme Court might strike down the health care law, the President used terms normally invoked by conservatives to attack decisions they don't like." After playing a clip of the comments in question, Williams did mention: "The President did dial back his remarks yesterday, saying simply the courts have shown restraint in overruling acts of Congress..."
With the President's comments stirring controversy, Williams tried to bring the story to an end: "...some say everyone should now cool it." A sound bite followed of American University Washington Law School professor Stephen Wermiel, who concluded: "President Obama really stepped into a controversy by criticizing the judicial activism of the court, but I can't imagine the circumstances under which a federal judge would then order the Justice Department to explain the President's views."
Professor Wermiel is also the author of "Justice Brennan, Liberal Champion."
NBC largely ignored the fact that President Obama injected politics into the Supreme Court proceedings with his Monday comments. The only coverage of the misstep on the network prior to Wednesday night was a single news brief by Savannah Guthrie on Tuesday's Today: "President Obama predicted Monday that the Supreme Court will uphold his health care reform law when that ruling is announced in June. The President seemed to challenge the justices directly when he warned that overturning the law would hurt millions of Americans and amount to an overreach by the court."
Here is a full transcript of the April 4 Nightly News report:
7:09AM ET
BRIAN WILLIAMS: Politics are ideally supposed to stay out of the nation's courtrooms, but that's not what happened this week in a federal courtroom in Texas. One of the judges took issue with some of what President Obama said this week at the White House about the big health care case that's now in the hands of the Supreme Court. Our justice correspondent Pete Williams has more.
PETE WILLIAMS: The political controversy spilled into a Texas federal court, where the rules are designed to filter out politics, interrupting arguments about a challenge to part of the Obama health care law. Jerry smith, an appeals court judge, put a Justice Department lawyer on the spot yesterday about a comment earlier this week from President Obama.
JERRY SMITH: I'm referring to statements by the President in the past few days to the effect, and I'm sure you've heard about them, that it is somehow inappropriate for what he termed unelected judges to strike acts of Congress.
WILLIAMS: On Monday, asked about predictions that the Supreme Court might strike down the health care law, the President used terms normally invoked by conservatives to attack decisions they don't like.
BARACK OBAMA: For years, what we've heard is the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint. That an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law. Well, it's a good example.
WILLIAMS: He said it would be unprecedented to overturn a law passed by a majority in Congress. Judge Smith, a Reagan appointee, demanded a letter from the government by noon tomorrow stating its position on the power of the courts to strike down laws. Republicans in Congress pounced too. The Senate's Minority Leader Mitch McConnell circulated a list of 169 times the Supreme Court has struck down federal laws in part or completely. The President did dial back his remarks yesterday, saying simply the courts have shown restraint in overruling acts of Congress, but some say everyone should now cool it.
STEPHEN WERMIEL [PROFESSOR, AMERICAN UNIVERSITY WASHINGTON COLLEGE OF LAW]: President Obama really stepped into a controversy by criticizing the judicial activism of the court, but I can't imagine the circumstances under which a federal judge would then order the Justice Department to explain the President's views.
WILLIAMS: Unknown in all of this is whether the justices were listening. Most legal experts say even if they were, it won't make a difference in what they do. Pete Williams, NBC News, at the Supreme Court.
- Kyle Drennen's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
It's obvious
Submitted by fivestring_assassin on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 11:53am.
this MisAdministration does not understand the importance of separation of powers
They are reckless and abusive...they need to be shown the exit doors in November
Obama does not need to obey Constitution
Submitted by MaximusBraveheart on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 2:57pm.
Obama thinks our system is racist, therefore he feels compelled to smear, twist and thumb his nose at it as often as possible. Like in his current statement, the appointments when not in recess and on and on.
---------
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/03/11/What%20Is%20Critical%...
Last week, Breitbart.com released video demonstrating Barack Obama’s close relationship with Derrick Bell, the father of Critical Race Theory (CRT). And we’ve seen Soledad O’Brien try to twist the definition of critical race theory in order to protect Obama by grabbing a quick definition from Wikipedia. But just what is CRT? Why is it so dangerous? And what role does it play in President Obama’s thinking?
Let’s begin from the beginning.
CRT was an intellectual development in the late 1970s and early 1980s in which some scholars, perturbed by what they perceived as a loss of momentum in the movement for racial equality, began to doubt that the constitutional and legal system itself had the capacity for change.
This criticism mirrored a Marxist attack long voiced in academia: that the Constitution had been a capitalist document incapable of allowing for the redistributionist change necessary to create a more equal world. To create a more equal world, the Constitution and the legal system would have to be endlessly criticized – hence critical theory – and torn down from within.
The Marxist criticism of the system was called critical theory; the racial criticism of the system was therefore called Critical Race Theory. == end snip==
-- Maximusbraveheart -- Is TRUTH knowable? Moral Relativism is the abandonment of Truth. Truth is knowable. Truth conforms to Reality. Reality is observable by evidence & witness in this day & from history. Relativism is Sesame Street play land.
They understand it just fine, FA.
Submitted by Newsbubba on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 3:46pm.
They just don't like it, or agree with the concept.
After all, it is exceedingly tough to be the Supreme Ruler of the USSA if you actually have checks and balances working against you.
Standard NBC
Submitted by John21 on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 11:50am.
Standard NBC defense of their liberal master. Mr. Williams did you recieve a nice pat on the head from the White House for your propaganda broadcast. Maybe if you try real hard next time they will scratch behind your ear. I know all puppy dogs like that.
This issue has the left
Submitted by LAM SON 719 on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 11:55am.
This issue has the left running in terror. Americans expect the judical system to question the constitionality of laws. If it doesn't what purpose does it serve?
Interesting
Submitted by KornKing on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 11:59am.
All you would hear from the lapdogs was urging for Chief Justice Roberts to "put politics aside" when it came to Obamacare, you never heard anyone say a thing about how it would be nice if Kagan or Sotamayor could do so.
"Politics are ideally
Submitted by forest on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 11:57am.
"Politics are ideally supposed to stay out of the nation's courtrooms, but that's not what happened this week in a federal courtroom in Texas."
Then Obama shouldn't be shooting his mouth off about a pending decision.
Stephen Wermiel, who concluded: "President Obama really stepped into a controversy by criticizing the judicial activism of the court.."
So it's an accepted fact that the court is activist? Right.
Williams explained: "On Monday, asked about predictions that the Supreme Court might strike down the health care law, the President used terms normally invoked by conservatives to attack decisions they don't like."
Obama is "used terms" and conservatives "attack decisions they don't like". Got it. Conservatives actually wait for a decision to "attack"?
Politics ideally out of the courtroom?
Submitted by bkeyser on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 11:57am.
What planet is this guy living on?
More projection by the left again...
Submitted by iamsaved on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 11:58am.
It never fails. The left commits the offense and then quickly blames the right.
It's just mindboggling when a liberal has the facts staring them in the face and they totally ignore them and go on the attack using lies, innuendo and vitriol to foster their claims.
It's about time the courts responded to the unprovoked smears on their integrity by Obama. His narcissistic beliefs that he has been annointed the true totalitarian leader of this country has to be confronted.
Obama is an antichrist (notice I didn't say "The Antichrist" mentioned in scripture) based on his actions and comments. His countless lies convict him on that front.
He may not be "The Antichrist" described in the Book of Revelation, but he sure comes close to being the counterfeit John the Baptist - a cry in the wilderness announcing the coming of the real one. Obama gives a good preview of what the real Antichrist will be like and how he will deceive. This man is evil.
Clean house. Fire em all!
Submitted by MaximusBraveheart on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 2:20pm.
Don't know how anyone could consider them a news source. This is war on America. Their incessant lying; we won't forget! They must be held accountable to truth and facts.
-- Maximusbraveheart -- Is TRUTH knowable? Moral Relativism is the abandonment of Truth. Truth is knowable. Truth conforms to Reality. Reality is observable by evidence & witness in this day & from history. Relativism is Sesame Street play land.
NBC = Nothing But Crap
Submitted by Galvanic on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 12:07pm.
STEPHEN WERMIEL [PROFESSOR, AMERICAN UNIVERSITY WASHINGTON COLLEGE OF LAW]: President Obama really stepped into a controversy by criticizing the judicial activism of the court, but I can't imagine the circumstances under which a federal judge would then order the Justice Department to explain the President's views.
First off, both Wermiel and the President are totally wrong in suggesting that overturning un-Constitutional laws amounts to "judicial activism." Even Obama's own mentor at Harvard Law School -- Prof. Tribe -- called him out on it.
As to the uniqueness of a Federal appellate judge ordering the Justice Department to explain the President's views, it may in fact be unprecedented. But when was the last time that a sitting President suggested that it would be unprecedented for the Supreme Court to overturn major legislation? They did it in the early days of the New Deal. IT'S BEEN THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY SINCE AT LEAST 1803 (Marbury v. Madison).
So, if a Justice Dept toadie is arguing a case before my court, I have every right to ask that lawyer's bosses to clarify their understanding of the Constitution. It's obvious that after Obama shot his mouth off, the Administration is trying to turn this on the Republicans and the Court (They used a similar tactic on the Obamacare contraception issue, turning it from a First Amendment issue to a women's rights issue).
And it's readily apparent that NBC is assisting with that effort.
How dare they!
Submitted by CobraMan on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 12:12pm.
"The political controversy spilled into a Texas federal court, where the rules are designed to filter out politics, interrupting arguments about a challenge to part of the Obama health care law. Jerry smith, an appeals court judge, put a Justice Department lawyer on the spot yesterday about a comment earlier this week from President Obama."
So, a Judge asked about something Obama said, and asked this of an Obama administration DOJ attorney during a trial over Obama's "legacy" heath care policies as codified by law, and this is supposedly bringing politics into the courtroom? Yea, right, and I guess that no Judge ever asked, say, a corporate attorney about something the CEO said while that corporation was, say, being sued!
NCB, jut how stupid do you think we are? Of course a Judge would ask this question: it's pertinent to the case at hand!
By the way, NBC, Judges do not "interrupt" courtroom proceedings, they totally control them. This isn't some debate with the Judge as an impartial observer.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Politics is...
Submitted by GeneralAl on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 12:23pm.
Politics is allowed bo be in the court room if a liberal judge is presiding. Then, its wholly acceptable and prudent. Yuk!
"Old Soldiers never die, they just fade away"!
Prophetic -- or pathetic -- comparison
Submitted by Pilgrim1949 on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 12:31pm.
Apostasy Alert! Apostasy Alert!
The Obamessiah (Peas-and-broccoli Be Upon Him) has been criticized by someone of less-than-Obam-Allah status. This affront to the The Holy One cannot be permitted to go unanswered.
We must declare (quasi)journalistic jihad against the brazen infidels who dare question Dear Leader's absolute, divine authority over all of life. We must hunt down and destroy them before they cause the sinister sin of doubt to enter the pliable and easily-influenced minds of the gullibl---er, um---great unwashed masses of true believing Kool-Aid drinkers everywhere.
"Ye canne change the laws of physics....." but some politicians believe that with the right legislation you can pretend they don't really apply to your own pet projects...
Obama's attack on the Supreme Court...
Submitted by Conservator on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 12:44pm.
...is not going to be forgotten and his character assignation of the Justices is inexcusable - "an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law." This from a so-called constitutional scholar is reprehensible. Obamcare is going down just like his presidency and the left MSM can't stop the train-wreck (sic) let Williams and NBC run any story they want to support Obama because nothing can be done to save the most incompetent President in America's history.
Calling on perfessionals....
Submitted by Tomorama on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 12:47pm.
This would have been a good time for a real perfessional reporter.................. errrrr BriBri to also include that Obysmals mentor even stated Obysmal was flat out wrong in his own words.
The judge just wants clarification and not from the media who** lapdogs like BriBri.
Goldberg said that NBC should divest from MSDNC, really Bernie, they are the same thing MINUS the yelling and name calling on PMSDNC.
Same leftist, shill, no conservative thoughts allowed and every issue is from the leftist shill perspective - PERIOD.
Bri-Bri Willilams is a pure
Submitted by killa37 on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 12:58pm.
Bri-Bri Willilams is a pure and adulturated knee-pad wearing, bowing from the waist Boy Baraka queebie...............what else would anyone expect from him?? And this judge was guaran-damn-teed right about what he was sayin' (Obamaspeak)........the big-mouthed purple-lipped petulan-punk poser President stuck his own big nose into this brouhaha, and now he can suffer the consequenses of his stupidity.
Watching his li'l Opie JayJay Carney trying to spin his way out of the Supreme Court remarks was almost embarrassing!!!
Nosing in the wrong place
Submitted by jon_torlin on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 1:12pm.
He's stuck his nose in a few too many things, but this might be the first time someone took a swipe right back at him and it's about damn time too. The judge in Houston has to have realized that DuhOne's been crossing a few lines and decided to step up and challenge that, would that Congress could do the same.
And killa, it ain't stupidity, he was challenging them and didn't expect them to accept the challenge. He thought he could intimidate them like he's done others. He knows what he's doing, what he wasn't banking on was someone not hitting back in this case.
-Jon
You speak TROOF,
Submitted by killa37 on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 1:50pm.
You speak TROOF, Jon-E-Boy................and it should be happening on a never-ending basis these days - hell, it should have been happening from Day Won!! The petulant punk cannot accept criticism or any challenges to his much over-vaunted 'brilliance', and you KNOW that the GOP isn't going to start bitch-slapping the little twerp for everything that he's done and continues to do.......................I guess it'll be up to us 'real' Americans, like this judge, or Joe Arpaio, and others, to keep this little commie prick on the defensive - something he is NOT accustomed to.
I promise you - I don't think there has been ONE day in the past 4 years where I haven't been totally astonished by what comes out of Boy Baraka's mouth and mind....................and it's even more amazing to me that the StateRun Media and the blind faith followers can't see and hear and understand what we've allready figured out about this guy - the biggest threat to this country since it's inception.
Even more more amazing
Submitted by Model850 on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 3:26pm.
I used "more" twice on purpose since you had already said "more amazing."
"...it's even more amazing to me that the StateRun Media and the blind faith followers can't see and hear and understand what we've allready figured out about this guy...."
To me it's even 'more more' amazing that the spineless Republicans in the House have just sat back and watched it all happening without even trying to do anything to rein in the poseur.
If Obeyme wins a second term I doubt a Republican controlled House and Senate (if the Rs can take it back) would make any difference. Obeyme would just "rule" by virtue of executive orders and the Congressional Republicans would just smile and "go along to get along."
"some say everyone should now cool it."
Submitted by Newsbubba on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 3:58pm.
Ain't that what someone who is getting their ass kicked in a fight that THEY started usually says?
You can bet your sweet ass that if Obama was kicking the Texas judge around, they would ALL be cheering him on like a bunch of sixth grade wanabe's cheer on the schoolyard bully when he is whipping up on somebody.
God bless Texas. I'm glad somebody finally checked their package and decided to take a swing at the RBFSOB. He is a bully, and that is the ONLY way to handle him.
He needs his ass kicked good and proper. "Time to draw a hard line."
Here come da Judge!
The left really hates it.....
Submitted by almostacowboy on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 1:15pm.
when we fight back.....or use facts. Most bullies do.
I have an idea....
Submitted by c5then on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 1:36pm.
Maybe NBC can edit what the judge actually said and make it sound really ominous and racist.
Madison and Jefferson and Franklin built a Republic - Roberts killed it!
Tell
Submitted by locomotivebreath1901 on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 1:42pm.
I'll see your 'politics in the courtroom,' NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams, and raise you 'cranial diarrhea spew in the newsroom.'
Your tell was that brown stain on your seat.
getting ready for Shock and Awe
Submitted by MidAmerica on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 1:47pm.
I'm hoping all of the individuals, groups, businesses and professions obama has insulted over the last four years are fed up and refuse to take it any longer. I hope the political barage against him will be so intense that it overwhelms the ability of the MSM to counter-attack in defense of obama.
I fully expect that when the
Submitted by LinTaylor on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 2:30pm.
I fully expect that when the SCOTUS strikes down this basilisk of a law, our beloved President will get up at his podium and thunder "Do you have any idea who I am?! I'm Barack Hussein Obama!" like a cheap Charles Foster Kane wannabe.
And the media will STILL gush over him like his feces are gem-encrusted gold.
Gosh, Bri-Bri~
Submitted by GG_NB on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 2:44pm.
Don't you ever tire of pretending to be a journalist? Strike that -- a talking suit for the lib agenda?
Maybe, just maybe, someone -- somewhere -- got sick and tired of all the crapola and thug-like intimidation and decided it was time to discipline/call out an out-of-control, disrespectful gameplaying politician. Astounding that the manipulative comments to the Supremes actually came from a sitting President. Embarrassing and outrageous.
"If not us, who? If not now, when?"
~Ronald Reagan
Brian and Obama are both confused...
Submitted by crimsonspark on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 2:59pm.
Bri Bri is confusing Judge Smith rightly questioning Obama's screwed up view of the role of SCOTUS with bringing politics into the courtroom, and Obama is confusing SCOTUS actually doing its job with judicial activism. I have to admit, seeing Judge Smith Bench-slap the DOJ made my day. It also made me proud that this happened in my home state. Maybe if Obama spent more time watch School House Rock instead of golfing, he would actually understand how our government works. Constitutional Scholar my arse!
Rockin'!
Submitted by GG_NB on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 3:56pm.
I love SchoolHouse Rock! Too funny...and yeah, O should review that one.
"If not us, who? If not now, when?"
~Ronald Reagan
Brian who?
Submitted by oldfart on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 3:05pm.
He must be a new guy to broadcast journalism.
If it wasn't for. . .
Submitted by rickbren on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 3:15pm.
. . . NewsBusters, none of these clowns would get much air time.
Enough of His Unconstitutional BS!
Submitted by HardRightTurn on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 3:30pm.
I demand Obama release his Harvard Law School transcripts and a copy of his diploma to prove he has a law degree.
To more fully comprehend the Left, one must read “Leftism As Psychopathy” by John Ray, M.A., Ph.D. Caution, it might scare you a little bit.
http://jonjayray.tripod.com/psycho.html
Hearing his statement proves
Submitted by MaximusBraveheart on Thu, 04/05/2012 - 11:08pm.
Hearing his statement proves how misinformed he is. Very sad days for our Country. Sold a bill of goods (by the "news" staff) yet no product.
-- Maximusbraveheart -- Is TRUTH knowable? Moral Relativism is the abandonment of Truth. Truth is knowable. Truth conforms to Reality. Reality is observable by evidence & witness in this day & from history. Relativism is Sesame Street play land.
And Americans say...
Submitted by GG_NB on Fri, 04/06/2012 - 11:18am.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics...
"If not us, who? If not now, when?"
~Ronald Reagan