It wasn't enough to shove through ObamaCare with kickbacks and pay-offs and an unconstitutional requirement that every American purchase health insurance; Obama now takes the unprecedented step of warning the Supreme Court not to overturn his signature legislation that the majority of Americans do not want. Yes, Obama has a lot of gall and arrogance, but we knew that already.

A 2,700 page bill which was never read by the Congress that passed it, riddled with omissions and unintended or not understood consequences, demands not only that all Americans purchase health insurance but also requires insurance companies to offer the coverage the Health and Human Secretary determines. It requires even those with religious objections to purchase coverage for contraception and abortion causing drugs. The legislation creates huge government, including 4,000 new IRS agents, to administer this mammoth take over with a flow chart that reminds us more of a confused state road map.

The government argued poorly before SCOTUS last week because it's simply impossible to defend taking over the entire health care industry while forcing Americans to purchase a product totally designed by the US government. Comments and questions by the Court appeared to reveal that indeed SCOTUS would overturn ObamaCare. And now, Obama dares to warn the court not to overturn the unconstitutional law because Justices are not elected but rather appointed?

The court was stacked in Obama's favor as much as possible with Obama having appointed both Sotameyer and Elaine Kagen. Kagen should have recused herself, or someone should have force her recusal since she served as the White House lawyer during the building of the ObamaCare legislation. Yet Obama now wants America to believe that if SCOTUS overturns the law on grounds of an unconstitutional mandate - they are the activists? Obama tries to argue the law was voted in by a bi-partisan majority. The vote was 219 for and 212 against, with all Republicans in the House voting against the bill. It pass the senate with 60 yeas and 39 nays, again, not one Republican Senator voted for Obamacare. Many of the Democrats who voted for ObamaCare have been replaced in the 2010 election. Anyway you slice it, ObamaCare was NOT a bi-partisan bill; however, unconstitutional legislation is still unconstitutional regardless of the votes.

Using political tricks for accounting, brow beating and paying off politicians to vote for legislation is much more activism than a court merely reviewing a law to see if it passes muster with the founding document of this country. The US Constitution does not provide for the US government forcing a purchase upon an American simply because the person is breathing. The US Constitution also provides religious freedom and forbids the government making laws which interfere with an individual's right to make religious choices. Activism is a president who has ignored the US Constitution over and over; Activism is a Congress that ignores the Constitution and the will of the people who elected them.

Even Ruth Marcus, a supporter of ObamaCare and its mandate is chilled by Obama's attack on SCOTUS, recognizing the SCOTUS review of laws is the way our governing system was meant to work.

And yet, Obama's assault on "an unelected group of people" stopped me cold. Because, as the former constitutional law professor certainly understands, it is the essence of our governmental system to vest in the court the ultimate power to decide the meaning of the constitution. Even if, as the president said, it means overturning "a duly constituted and passed law."

Marcus notes that striking down unconstitutional laws is the very purpose of the Court and the majority by which the law passed is of no importance to SCOTUS consideration of its constitutionality.