Barack ObamaObama publicly questions why he should adhere to constitutional limits to his authority

An angry Barack Obama attacked the entire United States judicial system when asked about King v. Burwell after the Supreme Court took up a case challenging a key portion of Obamacare.

“There is no reason why the existing exchanges should be overturned through a court case,” growled Obama, despite the fact the Constitution created the federal courts to, in part, interpret federal law.

“Frankly, it shouldn’t have even been taken up,” Obama pouted.

The case before the Court argues that federal Obamacare tax credits cannot be given to people in states that have their own Obamacare exchanges.

Even the man who wrote the Obamacare bill agrees that the law, as written, does not allow that.

If the tax credits were blocked, it would undermine the entire Obamacare law.

Obama, on the other hand, argues he has the power to do whatever he wants, even if the law does not allow it.

Federal courts have been busy reminding Obama he is not an absolute dictator.

Obama’s case of stompy feet comes after a federal court also blocked his efforts to write his own immigration laws through Executive Order.  The court ruled Obama violated transparency laws by enacting his own rule without allowing the legally-required public comment and review.

Obama attacked the ruling as merely the opinion of “an individual district court judge,” apparently missing the irony of attacking the idea of someone doing something on his own.

Even though the courts have ordered Obama to stop implementing his immigration plan, Obama is also ignoring the court.

“Until we get clarity there, I don’t want to bring people in, have them apply and jump through a lot of hoops only to have it deferred and delayed further,” Obama said.

The courts gave Obama that clarity, striking down his scheme and rejecting his appeal.  In Obama’s mind, “clarity” means “I am the law.”

Obama has sustained a relentless attack on the Constitution’s limits on his power, and has obsessively attacked the Constitution’s creation of a judicial branch to check his power.

After the Supreme Court overturned a law criminalizing the production of certain books and movies mentioning political candidates, Obama directly and personally attacked Court justices during his 2010 State of the Union address, looking directly at them.

Last year, the court also rejected Obama’s argument that he can make appointments without the constitutionally-required “consent” of the Senate.

Obama’s seems to believe he can bully and threaten judges into obeying his will.  Attacks on judicial independence are usually only seen in Third World dictatorships.

In 2010 Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez, who has since kicked the oxygen habit, ordered the arrest of a judge who ruled against him and accused her of corruption.  That was the same year Obama used his State of the Union address to personally and directly accuse Supreme Court justices of promoting corruption.