You're watching...
FNC legal analysts Kimberly Guilfoyle and Peter Johnson, Jr. on Obama’s comments on the Supreme Court.
Also in this playlist...
Auto-advance: ON
Auto-advance
This transcript is automatically generated
The Justice Department and attorney general Eric Holder facing a noon deadline tomorrow.
Where -- Obama Justice Department to acknowledge the Supreme Court does have the -- overturn obamacare.
Joining us now Kimberly Guilfoyle former prosecutor cohost of the five on Fox News Channel.
Also what does Peter Johnson trial in the public to turn Fox News legal analyst thank you both for being here.
Can -- let's let's start with this I mean the spectacle of an appellate court judge ordering the US Justice Department.
Effectively the attorney general to turn the three pages single space please -- the least.
And and on judicial review.
Yes somebody got a little judicial spanking -- didn't -- I mean it's really inappropriate comments that he made in an Eric Holder tried to -- -- -- But basically it's time is that they're gonna have to come up with a response but that's just showing that the courts are a little bit tired of being bad now they have a serious job to do -- -- -- -- review.
This legislation and decide whether or not -- back.
Constitutional.
And whether or not the administration -- usurp the -- by putting in something that is not constitutionally a rift.
I'm and instead they sit there and -- -- -- and say that it's partisan politics -- I'm glad that they're stepping up like this and the court is saying give us an opinion on this.
-- -- -- -- I do and and I think it's appropriate and in this case any appellate court has the right to ask for additional brief boy you've seen here.
Is the White House kid caught red handed the president get caught red handed trying to subvert.
The constitution.
And I hate those kind of overblown statements but unfortunately.
In this case it's true to say that -- these people are not elected.
And the -- Terry and view is the view that we should all hold -- and there was a big majority and it's outrageous.
That's wrong.
It's royal constitutionally -- as -- if history is wrong morally it's wrong ethically strong as a matter natural law what is our president doing.
To the -- legal branches of government right.
Via text the divided government obviously in every way and this is now also consistent with comment -- -- across other areas were you surprised that the attorney general wasn't more contrite more.
If you will that is generous.
In in responding to the challenge from the appellate court.
-- today I -- he talked about.
Again going back defending the president's.
Suggestion really that -- his remarks were entirely appropriate even as he tried to walk -- back.
He really did he's no backsliding and let me -- that Michael Jackson he was trying to work -- for the president because quite clearly the president's comments were outrageous and inappropriate.
And he almost have little bit of a smirk on his face I don't think he handled it well at all at -- is further complicated the problem -- exacerbated it.
So he's doing his office Department of Justice at the service.
You know and the president I don't know who briefed him -- the president the told it was a good idea to take on the court.
And you know the separation of powers in the principles with -- this country we're founded on he didn't wanna be checked in overseen by anybody.
There is no example I can think of and history in which anyone has any president and has profited by taking on the Supreme Court and in Null and and frankly -- the comments made by the president in 2012.
Eclipse the that the comments made historically by FDR.
In his court packing.
And and -- to save it will you really don't have the authority the power to do that you're sending a signal powerful signal to the American people that.
Their determination which they believed to be and -- -- to their interest.
Is illegitimate.
And shouldn't be respected.
And so the president appoints federal district judges Circuit Court judges Supreme Court judges he is overarching responsibility -- Is to keep the mechanisms of government in place in accord with the constitution.
Not.
Obama care over all.
Right the constitution.
Overall.
Which all of these justices and this president -- taken notes through.
And demand.
I also found it should be -- percent not and do their job let justice and you know the government -- -- that we had set up that the founding obvious attempt upon the liberation outlet and work in see it through.
Don't you know circumvent in subvert justice -- -- -- It will word choice.
And we've got to run but the -- torture by the president and the attorney general.
Are referring to the supreme -- deference.
To congress.
I've never seen deference is -- part -- -- he channel -- at.
They have the law you do wrong again there's a deference to administrative determination.
By federal courts but they may be talking about it resumption of constitutionality.
Which is unimportant.
If if -- statute is unconstitutional.
Are -- its presumed to be unconstitutional.
It doesn't.
Statement that so now we get the third division the third division is -- I don't know whether it's if it's being done on purpose but not being done on purpose but the long term impact is bad for this country.
-- thank you very much Campbell thank you.
