The Act of a Small Man

Of all the banalities issued by President Obama in his 70-minute “State of the Union” address, the most egregious affront to sensibility was his petulant attempt to intimidate the Supreme Court of the United States.

Mr Obama ignored the fact that he was publicly criticizing the legitimate work of an entirely separate and independent branch of the government. He abandoned any semblance of good taste by castigating the members of the court seated directly in front of his podium. If they had been off to the left or right, Mr Obama could fault the teleprompter for obstructing his view of the Justices. But they were directly in front of him when he made his offensive, juvenile remark.

Referring to the Court’s 5-4 decision in the Citizens United vs. FEC ruling on January 21, which struck down the provisions of the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform Act limiting the capability of corporations to contribute to political campaigns, he said,”Last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates to special interests-including foreign corporations- to spend without limits in our elections.”

I wonder if he also finds fault with the Court’s 1954 decision in Brown vs Board of Education, which also reversed over a century of law, in that case striking down the Separate but Equal doctrine of the Plessy vs Ferguson decision of 1896 that allowed segregated education, and the Dred Scott decision of 1857 that declared that all blacks could never be citizens of the United States and permited slavery in all states.

Despite his rediculous opening comment on the practice of reversing malodorous precedent, Mr Obama continued, “I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, or worse, foreign interest.” I guess it would be alright if America’s most powerful unions and organizations of trial lawyers bankrolled America’s election, just not the awful corporations. Perhaps, in his extensive reading of the Court's decision in Citizens United vs FEC, Mr Obama failed to detect any of the three separate instances where the decision specifically excluded foreign corporations from the substance of the decision. He concluded his brief hissing fit, urging democrats and republicans in congress to pass a bill that would “right this wrong.”

For a man who is supposed to be a Constitutional lawyer, who has taught Law at the University of Chicago, he apparently he has difficulty with the words of the First Amendment, “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…” On the face of it, the First Amendment seems to be written in pretty clear language. It does not discuss who may have free speech. It prevents the Congress from regulating ANY speech. It is not that difficult to understand. Maybe they just don’t teach that concept at the Harvard Law School anymore.

What his ridiculous outburst indicates is contempt for the document he is sworn to defend and protect, the Constitution of the United States. He has the temerity to scold a separate branch of the government on their performance after he has failed so miserably in his first year in office. And then he compounds his eggregious behavior by instructing Congress, the other separate and distinct branch of the government, on how to chastise the Supreme Court.

No president has ever commited such a childish affront to the Supreme Court in particular, and the concept of separation of powers in general. Even Franklin Roosevelt, who was openly hostile to the court, never chastised the Justices directly before a joint session of Congress. President Obama has an ego with no limits, but has a record of performance that might more properly justify the practice of a little humility. Instead, we get a petulant outburst to a group of jurists whose intellectual water he could never hope to carry, let alone comprehend.