Who Says Obama Is Smart?

Yesterday afternoon. over the objections of Mexico, International Court of Justice, President Obama, The U.S. Department of Justice, the United Nations, most liberals and the man in the moon, Texas executed a child rapist/murderer. Thank you Texas and Rick Perry for getting rid of this thug and stop spending money to keep this thug alive and enjoying life while his victim, who was tortured and killed has been buried since 1994.
However, President Obama and Eric Holder show their ignorance of the law. These two fools thought the Supreme Court should stop the execution because a law might be passed that may overturn the conviction.
From the Supreme Court: Leal and the United States ask us to stay the execution so that Congress may consider whether to enact legislation implementing the Avena decision. Leal contends that the Due Process Clause prohibits Texas from executing
him while such legislation is under consideration.
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/11-5001.pdf

Fortunately, the Supremes are much, much smarter that Obama and Holder. The supremes smacked this atrgument down in 2 sentences: This argument is meritless. The Due Process Clause does not prohibit a State from carrying out a lawful judgment in light of unenacted legislation that might someday authorize a collateral attack on that judgment.
The Supremes went on: The United States does not endorse Leal’s due process claim. Instead, it asks us to stay the execution until January 2012 in support of our “future jurisdiction to review the judgment in a proceeding” under this yet-to-beenacted
legislation. Brief for United States as Amicus Curiae 2–3, n. 1. It relies on the fact that on June 14, 2011, Senator Patrick Leahy introduced implementing legislation in the Senate with the Executive Branch’s support. No implementing legislation has been introduced in the House. We reject this suggestion. First, we are doubtful that it is ever appropriate to stay a lower court judgment in light of unenacted legislation. Our task is to rule on what the law is, not what it might eventually be. In light of
Medellín I, it is clear that there is no “fair prospect that a majority of the Court will conclude that the decision below was erroneous,” O’Brien v. O’Laughlin, 557 U. S. ...
Finally the Supremes slapped down Obama and Holder again: We have no authority to stay an execution in light of an “appeal of the President,” post, at 6, presenting free-ranging assertions of foreign policy consequences, when those assertions come unaccompanied by a persuasive legal claim.

If George Bush made this argument, he would have been laughed at by the media and the media pundits, as well he should have been.
But Obama, the mental midget, gets a pass from the liberal media.
And just think he actually taught law at Chicago University. That is scary. No wonder he doesn't want his grades in college to be shown. It will probably show what a dunce he really is.
Worst President ever.