Our constitutional scholar president, getting it wrong again. Rather than "judicial activism", striking down this zombie apocalypse of a law is exactly what the SCOTUS is supposed to do: review law and decide if it is actually allowed under the restraints of the Constitution. That's their job, Buckwheat. If it is determined by an "unelected" (but presidentially appointed) court that the law is not constitutional, then it just goes back to you jokers to figure out how to write a law that can be upheld."I'm confident this will be upheld because it should be upheld," the president said Monday afternoon [...] The president said overturning the law would be "an unprecedented and extraordinary step" and compared the court's rejection of the law to "judicial activism.""For years what we've heard is the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism," the president said, baiting conservatives who have long complained about justices' political agendas. The president stressed that the judges are "unelected" and noted that the law was passed by a democratically elected Congress.
'Cause, like, that's YOUR job.
I would ask how stupid is this president, but then someone might tell me and I would have to cry or something.