In his own words: Obama on the judges

Judges “who strictly believe in the letter of the Constitution” need not apply:

Transcript:

SEN. BARACK OBAMA: Well, look, I think that you — what you can ask a judge is about their judicial philosophy. And as somebody who taught constitutional law for ten years, who actually knows a lot of the potential candidates for Supreme Court on the right as well as on the left ’cause I’ve taught with them or interacted with them in some way — I can tell you that how a Justice approaches their job, how they describe the path of interpreting the Constitution, I think can tell you a lot.

And so my criteria, for example, would be — if a Justice tells me that they only believe the strict letter of the Constitution — that means that they possibly don’t mean — believe in — a right to privacy that may not be perfectly enumerated in the Constitution but, you know, that I think is there.

I mean, the right to marry who you please isn’t in the Constitution. But I think all of us assume that if a state decided to pass a law saying, ‘Brian, you can’t marry the woman you love,’ that you’d think that was unconstitutional. Well, where does that come from? I think it comes from a right to privacy. That may not be listed in the Constitution but is implied by the structure of the Constitution.

So I can have that conversation with a judge. Now if it was a conservative who was listening to me right then says, ‘See? You know, he wants to allow the Court to legislate.’ Ninety-nine percent of cases the Constitution is actually gonna be clear. Ninety-nine percent of the cases are statutes or congressional intent is gonna be clear. But there are gonna be one percent, less than one percent of real hard cases.

WILLIAMS: Second Amendment last term.

OBAMA: Second Amendment last term is a great example, where the language of the Second Amendment is not perfectly clear. I believe that the Second Amendment is actually an individual right. I think that’s the better interpretation. You can make the other argument. And so I can have those kinds of discussions with a Justice without getting into the particulars of — is Roe versus Wade, as currently outlined, exactly what you believe? Or do you believe that the DC gun law should have been overturned? And I think Sen. McCain, if ends up being the nominee [sic], could have those same conversations as well.

Speaking of the Second Amendment, Dave Kopel has written the Gunning for Victory
Second Amendment voter guide.

Kopel asks,

Will the Second Amendment still have enough friends in Congress to defeat the anti-rights agenda that a President Obama would push? The answer may depend on how much volunteer time Second Amendment defenders devote to key congressional races in the next several days.

Digg!

Share on Facebook

Tags:

5 Responses to “In his own words: Obama on the judges”

  1. Anthony (Los Angeles) Says:

    “But I think all of us assume that if a state decided to pass a law saying, ‘Brian, you can’t marry the woman you love,’ that you’d think that was unconstitutional. Well, where does that come from? I think it comes from a right to privacy. That may not be listed in the Constitution but is implied by the structure of the Constitution.”

    Oh, please, O Prophet. Let me remind you of the 10th Amendment to the Constitution, part of the Bill of Rights:

    “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.”

    In other words, marriage isn’t covered by some tortured interpretation of the search and seizure clause of the 4th Amendment. The plain language of the 10th suffices: marriage isn’t a matter delegated to the federal government, therefore its regulation remain with the States or the People. Period.

    This guy’s interpretation of the Constitution is so at odds with what was intended, it’s scary. And, no, I’m not a “constitution in exile” nut. But Progressives have been using creative interpretations of the Constitution for 50 years to get the courts to give them what they couldn’t get through the legislatures.

  2. Barack Obama On Best Political Blogs » In his own words: Obama on the judges Says:

    […] In his own words: Obama on the judges Transcript: SEN. BARACK OBAMA: Well, look, I think that you — what you can ask a judge is about their judicial philosophy. And as somebody who taught constitutional law for ten years, who actually knows a lot of the potential candidates for Supreme Court on the right as well as on the left ’cause I’ve taught with them or interacted with them in some way — I can tell you that how a Justice approaches their job, how they describe the path of interpreting the Constitution, I think can tell you […]

  3. Mike-Garden State Patriot Blog Says:

    The Court didn’t go far enough in redistributing wealth, so why would we be suprised That One thinks he can see the Constitution in any way that suits his agenda?

    To libs, the Constitution is like a Rorschach test. You just see whatever you want to see.

  4. Fausta Says:

    Mike, I added your blog to my blogroll in the “Blogging From NJ” category.

  5. expat Says:

    Fausta,

    Have you seen the Thomas Sowell interview at NRO’s Uncommon Knowledge? Sowell is great. He takes the constitution issues straight to the basics.