Congress is not going to change the constitution for this.
Is there any evidence that Obama is pushing for a constitutional change? All I’ve heard is trying to work thru the legislative process.
I think he’s trying to keep all options open an thoroughly research ALL legislative options before committing to a push for an outright amendment. Clearly the ruling creates a problem that has to be dealt with somehow.
I don’t consider free speech to be a “problem”, but that’s for another thread. Suffice it to say that “clearly” is in the eye of the beholder.
I don’t consider money to be “speech,” but that’s another debate.
(Yes, I know that the Court only ruled that corporations can spend as much as they want on privately paid political ads, not that they could gve it to the candidates, but I think that’s a distinction with virtually no difference).
I’m not even sure the Court is wrong, by the way, but even if it’s right, it’s still a problem if the effect is that elections can essentially be bought and controlled by corporations.
Well, we could get the states to call for a constitutional convention. Even more unlikely than getting Congress to do anything useful, but it is always a possibility.
As Gandhi said, just because a cause is futile doesn’t mean you don’t still have an obligation to try.
There’s a reason they call politics “the art of the possible”, and a politician who spends his time and effort on futile causes doesn’t get anything at all done.
I’m wary of rallying behind this kind of thinking. One year ago, I would have thought that standing up for health insurance rescission, skyrocketing costs, and denial of pre-existing conditions wouldn’t make you look very good, either. I’ve got some serious egg on my face now, though.
“With all due deference to separation of powers . . .” :dubious: All due deference, like it’s a polite convention of society, or something?
How about now? I don’t see your point.
Calling them on the carpet with them sitting phyically in front of him and with the entire US government in the room? If you were a triangle, your apex would be greater than 90 degrees, I can tell you that.
“Calling them on the carpet” how? What did he actually do to them? What can he actually do to them?
I know the right wing press is trying to accuse Obama of having “intimidated” the Supreme Court, but that’s a load of crap. Are we supposed to think it was some kind of physical threat?
No, they can’t. They can propose amendments, which then have to be approved by 3/4 of the States to take effect.
:rolleyes: Fine, he’s not “fighting” the supreme court because he didn’t actually descend from dais and physically engage in fisticuffs with Scalia, with Biden and Thomas standing by to play tag team.
No, he’s not fighting with the Supreme Court because he’s not engaging in a power struggle with them or saying he or the gov’t don’t have to support their rulings. He’s just saying that the ruling was wrongly decided, and that he’ll encourage legislation to be passed that will pass the Courts muster. If your defining fighting with the Supreme Court as simply saying in public that you disagree with their decision, then every President since I’ve been alive has been fighting with the SCOTUS.
(duplicate post)
Really? I can recall a few things along the lines of “we respectfully disagree with the court’s decision but of course we will abide by its ruling” but nothing akin to this high profile declaration that “we think the court was wrong to decide this and we’re going to do everything in our power to get around it.”
And once again, what’s in it for Obama to embark on such a crusade? I wouldn’t think bringing public “heat” to Congress would make much difference, since presumably it’s already in the Democrats’ interest to curtail corporate campaign spending. Is Obama just flinging potential populist causes and seeing what sticks to the cross of gold?
(sorry for the duplicate post)
What makes you think that?!
:shrug: I had the impression that Republicans would benefit more, and the Dems would be agin’ it.
OK, if it is against the congressional Democrats’ interest – then I guess it’s a double WTF? Can Obama alienate his putative congressional allies any more than he has done?
Probably not applicable here and this quote is apocryphal and not even a notion I endorse but for fun:
“John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!” --President Andrew Jackson
