This transcript is automatically generated
Of them for -- -- it's now the judge never shies away from offering his opinion hot news senior judicial analyst -- an apology -- now.
Well singles may street I think that's that's serious homework assignment ask you -- so let's look at exactly what he said.
It would be unprecedented and extraordinary step to overturn a law that was passed by a strong majority of the democratically elected congress that sounds like.
The exact definition of what judicial review is that they can overturn a lot if they think it's not unconstitutional is -- what keeps you know the president for being McCain.
Yes -- -- at that I could've put it better.
Judicial review is the power of the courts to review what the other branches have done.
To review the legislature to review the -- remember they want to -- -- -- -- President Nixon to come from the Supreme Court wants to comply with eight with a subpoena.
And to -- What the other branches have done if -- inconsistent with the constitution this is on the law.
Since as attorney general holder just said 1803.
So when the president said it two days ago.
It would be unprecedented this is political hyperbole.
Now we get into a federal appellate court in the fifth circuit which is -- Texas and Louisiana that part of the country.
And the health care law is being challenged a different part than that which was challenged before the Supreme Court last week.
And one of the judges looks at the federal US attorney -- and says do you believe that we have the authority.
To overturn this portion of the what's being challenged.
And he said yes I do and then the judge says well -- boss apparently doesn't so we -- -- hear from your boss not the president but the attorney general.
Judges should not become like politicians.
And they -- he was being like I auditioned my.
A little bit too political -- looking -- retaliation if as well lawyers had said in the courtroom to him or in a formal.
Document filed with his court.
We deny any authority of this court.
To overturn the challenged portion of the health care act that would have been outrageous inconsistently 200 years of jurisprudence and it would have been summarily rejected.
But when the president says that to reporters a thousand miles away -- he's running for reelection it's political hyperbole.
The president however.
Must know that what he said.
Was a 180 degrees from the truth.
He's a graduate of Harvard Law School frank was the chair of the Harvard more review which is the most prestigious position but a law student can -- He was a lecturer in constitutional of the University of Chicago of Chicago.
One of the two or three best -- schools in the country he taught this very subject constitutional law.
He himself approved it.
To legislation and the Bush Administration when -- was a senator and he disagreed with the legislation and he wanted the court to overturn -- we had to know what you're saying is that -- false absolutely and that's a political judgment.
For the people to make to they want to reelect a president who spoke costly to them in a form a political hyperbole which that resulted in the strip off all and -- Houston court.
Could you talk talk talk about it coming -- I but kind interrupted you earlier about this -- judge who is requesting this three page single space have written.
Piece at a unisex some kind of retaliation or is it a power play you mentioned that addition get involved in the political fray with a what I mean how low can we get -- -- wasn't to request it was an order.
And it was by a panel of three judges the presiding judges the one who speaks for the other two and so the three of them off -- and out of a hearing of the lawyers.
Must've conferred because in order actually came from the court's -- directing the attorney general to do this look the court doesn't have an army.
To enforce its will for the FBI the way the president does.
The courts will is enforced by its credibility its moral suasion the fact the we all know that the court has the final word on the law and the constitution.
But when the court gets into areas of politics it's sort of diminishes its its credibility.
As to why they ask these lawyers to say this I think the president struck a raw nerve.
I think a lot of judges from both sides of the aisle Democrats Republicans liberals conservatives progressive libertarian to say.
What back as he talked about this is so -- profoundly wrong.
It should not come out of the mouth of a public servant.
Much less a lawyer.
I can tell us why -- like yeah future only ever shied away at my expression not -- -- we love you so much thank -- so -- -- coming -- we have pretty.