An Insidious Form of Corruption

Obama went on a media tirade this week on the possibility (probability?) that the Supreme Court will declare Obamacare unconstitutional.  He claimed it was “judicial activism” if they would over-rule congress.  Apparently, his definition of judicial activism is when courts uphold the Constitution and it isn’t judicial activism when courts read words into the Constitution that doesn’t exist…such as “privacy” in the case of Roe v. Wade.

On the other side of the coin, is the view of Obama’s administration on not upholding existing law such as “No Child Left Behind (2001)” where the DoEd is passing out waivers like candy to spoiled children.  Another example is the “Defense of Marriage Act (1996).”

The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) (Pub.L. 104-199, 110 Stat. 2419, enacted September 21, 1996, 1 U.S.C. § 7 and 28 U.S.C. § 1738C) is a United States federal law that defines marriage as the legal union of one man and one woman. The law passed both houses of Congress by large majorities and was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on September 21, 1996.

For over 200 years, administrations have supported laws passed by Congress when those laws have come under fire and judicial review…even law the current administration disapproves.  Obama has broken that tradition.  Upon entering office they grudgingly agreed to support DOMA.  When liberal and gay activists filed suit, the government initially supported DOMA but that support was minimal.

Finally, in 2011, the Obama Administration declared Section 3 of that law was unconstitutional using the ruling of a Federal District Court.  The district court’s ruling was under appeal but it was sufficient for Obama to declare, though it would continue to enforce the law, it would no longer defend it in court. However when Obamacare was declared unconstitutional by two Federal Appellate Courts, Obama continued to push the implementation of Obamacare.

Another example is the Immigration Reform Act of 1996.  That act requires Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to enforce a number of provisions governing federal and state benefits to illegal aliens and employment verification among other revised provisions to existing law. 

The Obama Administration has issued an Executive Memo waiving portions of the 1996 act that effectively grants amnesty to a large number of illegal aliens.

(The Daily Caller) — President Barack Obama’s administration is quietly offering a quasi-amnesty for hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants aiming to win reelection by mobilizing a wave of new Hispanic voters without alienating the populous at large, say supporters of stronger immigration law enforcement.  The new rules were quietly announced Friday with a new memo from top officials at the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency. The “prosecutorial discretion” memo says officials need not enforce immigration laws if illegal immigrants are enrolled in an education center or if their relatives have volunteered for the US military.

The failure of this administration to support and uphold existing law is a violation of Obama’s Oath of Office in spirit if not in fact.  He and those under him, have created a major crack in the stability of our government.  If the Executive can ignore law, constraints on his office and is allowed to continue to do so, our nation will slide into anarchy.  For if law is mutable on a whim, nothing will prevent government to define or redefine law to suit their agenda.

Once trust in government is lost, as it has in the Obama Administration, can it be regained?

I don’t know but I fear it cannot. Kris Kobach, substituting on the Greg Knapp radio show this morning, called it, “an insidious form of corruption.” Insidious. That description fits Obama perfectly.                             

1 thought on “An Insidious Form of Corruption

Comments are closed.