His comments in the 2010 State of the Unionaddress regarding the Citizens United v. FEC decision, a controversial campaign finance ruling, could have been excused, although criticizing the Supreme Court during such a speech is a bit childish. But his warnings several weeks ago display a poor conception of the judiciary and its role.

As the Wall Street Journal reports, President Obama said that if the Supreme Court struck down his prized health care legislation, it would be an “unprecedented, extraordinary step.” Furthermore, he pontificated “for years, what we’ve heard is the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism or the lack of judicial restraint, that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law.” In this way, he joins the ranks of Presidents Andrew Jackson and Franklin D. Roosevelt in threatening the Supreme Court.

It is important to note that Jackson’s and Roosevelt’s amazing presidential leadership made up for, at least a little, their voracious desire for power; conversely, President Obama has nowhere to hide: He has not revolutionized American democracy, and although he aspires to FDR greatness, he has fallen far short of the bar.

His logic seems to suggest that the judiciary should bow to the beck and call of the other branches of government with little regard for the unconstitutionality of a “duly constituted and passed law,” although history paints a bit of a different picture.

Consider Korematsu v. United States, now considered one of the worst decisions of all time, in which the Court followed suit with the President and Congress in interning Japanese-American citizens. Perhaps even Dennis v. United States, in which the Court completely differed to Congress with regards to freedom of speech, upholding the villainous Smith Act, would be a better example of how, when the courts remain silent, totalitarianism may be unleashed. Using the President’s logic, Marbury v. Madison, which established judicial review, might never have been decided or even Brown v. Board of Education, which ruled segregated schools unconstitutional, since the Judiciary Act of 1789 and segregation was established by the federal and duly elected state officials all over the country, respectively.

President Obama does, though, have one thing correct: Conservatives are sounding a bit hypocritical. They decry Warren Court-style jurisprudence, but when it comes to a law they don’t like, they urge the Court to act. A more consistent approach to the judiciary would be favorable, but then again, President Obama is being hypocritical in the reverse way.

And Obama is mistaken in his opinion with regard to his prized legislative masterpiece: the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. It should be overturned and here’s why:

First and foremost, the individual mandate has got to go. I completely understand the Obama Administration’s position on the importance of what it has come to view as the crux of the law: Without the individual mandate, it becomes incredibly unfair to force insurance companies to insure people regardless of pre-existing conditions. Nonetheless, this individual mandate is repugnant to my view of liberty – one which encompasses a right to privacy that grants the individual the prerogative to make freely personal choices about his own health.

The right to privacy that prevents the government from banning birth control (Griswold v. Connecticut), abortion (Roe v. Wade), and consensual homosexual sex (Lawrence v. Texas) is the same right to privacy that protects the individual from the yoke of oppression of a government that decrees he must buy health insurance or else. This right to privacy affords to each and every American citizen the leeway to make personal decisions without penalty of law and fine. To say that Americans can live in a country without any regulations would be to support anarchy; but, conversely, to say that Americans should live in a country in which the government first mandates health insurance would set the United States on a crash course to autocracy and would cast aside substantive liberty in this country – a cornerstone of American Constitutional law since the Supreme Court’s opinion in Meyer v. Nebraska.

First, the federal government wants to force health insurance on us all – next it could be forcing certain operations, pooling medical charts and creating a central database, slowly but surely corroding the intimacy of the privileged relationship of doctor and patient. Although mentioning the proverbial slippery slope is undoubtedly a “what-if” argument, based only on hypothetical possibilities, these possibilities become more tangible and less hypothetical by the second without cognizance as to irreparable damage to civil liberties this law is inflicting.

On a more technical note, this individual mandate also, in my opinion, violates the Commerce Clause, although the health insurance regulations do not. From the mandate perspective, the commerce clause only grants the federal government authority to regulate existing interstate commerce clause. Since these people have not already purchased the insurance, there is no existing commerce; therefore, the commerce clause does not justify this mandate (in case substantive liberty is too abstract).

The provisions, however, forcing the insurance companies to accept people with pre-existing conditions and cover children on their parents’ plan until they reach the age of 26, as well as parts of the law that force certain restaurants to post counts of the calories on their menus, are constitutional – a power the federal government possesses squarely within the commerce clause.

Anyone who argues health care is not an interstate business overlooks the fact that there are numerous health care companies with thousands of customers all over the country. Although this form of commerce is not as traditional as items tangibly crossing interstate lines, it is indisputable that the health-care industry does involve the dispensing of product (in this case health insurance) over state borders; likewise, as the Warren Court heroically ruled in Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States, the restaurant industry can be regulated through their dependence on food crossing state lines. By this same logic, it seems the health industry, as well as the restaurant industry with regards to calorie postings on menus, would fall under the direction of the Commerce Clause as well.

Without the individual mandate, though, the provisions governing the insurance companies seem highly unfair. In order for the system to work, there must be some incentive for people to purchase health care while they’re still healthy to fund the insurance for those who aren’t. Perhaps for more socialistic democracies in Europe, universal health care is ideologically compatible, but for America, whose economy is nestled somewhere cozily between capitalism and socialism (closer to the capitalism side though), such a scene is not well-suited for our balanced economy.

Nor is a President who says an utterly untrue political remark intended to intimidate Supreme Court justices – thank goodness for Judge Jerry Smith of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, who ordered the Department of Justice to submit a no less than three-page, single-spaced letter explaining the President’s remark. At least there are people like him around to keep us cognizant of the importance of the judiciary – and remind the more raucous executive branch that much of modern society and the civil liberties we have come to cherish today are rooted in ground-breaking judicial opinions.

At Fairmont, all shorts, dresses and skirts must be at fingertip length; if a student is caught breaking this rule, she’s asked to change into an alternative that’s the appropriate length for the school dress code.

“I try to respect the dress code, but it is very difficult to find shorts that are fingertip-length for me, especially when I have long arms. I understand that the school can’t make an exception for some students, but I hate looking for long-enough shorts for school,” said junior Julia Molnar.

Many popular spring fashions, however, do fall within the dress code at Fairmont, especially maxi skirts and colorful skinny jeans.

“Every school has to have a dress code, and I do think that ours is reasonable to some extent,” said freshman Christy Wright. “With the fashions out this spring, it almost makes it more manageable to follow the dress code.”

Noting colorful capris she’s purchased, Wright added, “They are still fashionable, but appropriate for school.”

What’s all the rage?

Like Midwesterners’ moods, clothing tends to brighten in the spring. But this spring, fashion almost seems to jump out at people because of the increasingly popular neon colors. Everything neon – from neon necklaces to neon skinny jeans – is all the rage, according to popular magazines.

Bright colors seem to be a common theme among fashion magazines, but do the students who walk the halls of Fairmont agree that this is the latest and trendiest fashion? In fact, bright colors have been flashing between classes at Fairmont, too.

“I love wearing bright neon colors for spring and I have seen many bright colors at popular clothing stores, like Forever 21 and Pac Sun. I am definitely excited to add bright corals and greens to my wardrobe,” said senior Jenna Lane.

Glamour magazine also is showing many tribal and floral prints on short dresses and maxi skirts. Along with wild prints, Glamour’s pages reflect a return to ‘70s style, albeit one that avoids the disco and “fro” looks. Glamour and other fashion magazines also are talking quite a bit about the “hipster” and grunge looks that give off a “hobo” style for spring. “Add a solid accessory to your printed dress like a navy hobo bag,” advises Glamour.

The pages of Seventeen magazine display the tribal patterns just like Glamour and claim that “hipster is the look of the season, along with fun, fringed over-the-shoulder bags, giving a Native American style to spring and summer.”

The return of the maxi skirt has caught the eye of at least one Fairmont student. “My style has always been very alternative and I like to try new styles all the time,” said senior Madison Koebke. “However, I am a big fan of the maxi skirt. It’s a cute and easy outfit for the spring and even summer.”

So what will the students at Fairmont add to their closets this spring? With all the latest fashion tips and trends, it looks like they’re going to be filled with an assortment of bright colors and exotic patterns. However, students must abide by the dress code at Fairmont and lengthen those hem lines or suffer the consequences.

Unfortunately, many of us also find our teen years marked by loss as grandparents age, become ill and die. I’m sure that somewhere in the back of my mind, I was aware of that possibility, but my world changed this spring when “Pap,” my mom’s father, died.

Oh, sure. I knew he’d had cancer for years. I saw that, on his bad days, my grandpa wouldn’t want to do anything but sleep. But on many other days, it seemed like he wasn’t sick at all … he looked fine. And I will admit that I caught myself a couple of times looking at him and saying that nothing was wrong with him.

But that was just wishful thinking. I think that I can no longer count March 2 as a day because that was the worst day of my life. I say that because when we took Grandpa into the hospital, I actually thought he was going to come home again. The doctors just said that he had to get hydrated and get rid of an infection.

We hung around his hospital room for days, mostly just watching him sleep. Some days, he would actually eat a little or stay awake long enough to watch some TV. The day he died we were watching the Kentucky Wildcats men’s team play their final home game of the season.

Bonding time with Pap

My grandpa and I spent a lot of time together over the years. During summer vacations, I’d visit his home in Portsmouth, Ohio, every chance I had, and I spent all my spring breaks at my grandparents’ home.

We also did a lot of things together. Some were specific events, like going over to Indianapolis for the NHRA Drag Racing Series every Labor Day weekend. Other things we did together may seem like a big waste of time to others, but not to me. For me, it was all bonding time with Pap.

We always worked together at the bowling alley on Friday nights. Things were usually slow, but we didn’t care; it gave us time to play cards or just talk.

I’ll also always remember how we “shopped” on the Internet for cars or trucks he wanted. He never bought any of them, but he always said he just wanted to see what was out there and what condition they were in. That may sound boring, but I always looked forward hearing Grandpa say, “Let’s go look at some trucks.”

Another thing I really liked was that we would always just get in the car and drive. It didn’t matter about where we went or what we were going to do. Pap always said, “We go the way the road takes us.” I think we traveled those back roads so much that I could drive them blind-folded (bad idea – too many turns). One thing that I always thought was suspicious was that we always ended up at the house that he and his dad had built.

Time runs out for adventures

Although Grandpa and I shared a lot of special times, I still feel cheated. Grandpa and I had discussed many more adventures we wanted to experience. He always said he wanted to do those things, and I just kept saying that we would do them someday.

For example, we talked about going to the NASCAR race in Sparta, Kentucky. Another thing we always said we were going to do was to go to the drag races down in Bristol, Tennessee. Grandpa always said he wanted to know what the cars sounded like there since the track was in the mountains. I’d still like to do that one for him.

The big trip we talked about making was to the Smokey Mountains in the RV that he had bought a couple of years ago. Grandpa had been to the Smokey Mountains before and always talked about how he’d like to go there again.

Now that Pap is no longer here, I feel bad that we never got around to doing those things.

Waiting for time to heal the wounds

I’m sure there are people who think losing a grandparent isn’t really a big deal, but those are the people who don’t have a close relationship with their grandparents. I was really close with my grandpa because I was always with him. And when my grandpa died, I didn’t just lose a grandpa, I also lost my best friend, a loved one and a partner.

And now that two months has passed, I look back and I still can’t believe he’s gone. The first time I went down to my grandparents’ house after he had died, I expected to see him sitting in his chair when I walked down their hallway or coming out of his bedroom after just waking up from his nap.

People say it gets easier over time, but that’s hard for me to believe right now. I feel like a big piece of me died the day he passed.

When my grief begins to fade, I’ll try to figure out a way to pick up the pieces and move on. Yeah, I lost an important part of my life when Pap died. But I recognize that the time and experiences I shared with my grandpa mean that I’ll actually have a little bit of him with me for the rest of my life.

Also, any Fairmont High School boys and girls interested in running cross-country for the 2012-2013 school year are encouraged to attend the informational meeting Tuesday, May 15, 2012. The meeting will take place in Room 320 and begin at 3:15 p.m.

Individual winners included freshman Ian Steiner, who finished 2^nd  in first singles; junior Adam Wolfe, who finished 2^nd at second singles; and junior Nathan Bare, who was the third singles champion.

The first doubles team of freshman Sully O’Hara and junior Trevor O’Hara, brothers, finished in 3^rd place and the second doubles team of junior Abhijit Kumbhani and sophomore OJ Agada finished 5^th place.