(Thumbnail image: The Washington Post)

“With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that, I believe, will open the floodgates for special interests, including foreign corporations, to spend without limit in our elections.” (CNN)

Call it the "lips read round the world": Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito is making headlines for appearing to mouth the words “not true” in response to Mr. Obama’s criticism during the State of the Union Address. The question everyone is asking is -- who's in the wrong — The President for his criticism, or Alito for his reaction. 

We take a look at perspectives from MSNBC, ABC, and The Volokh Conspiracy legal blog.

President Obama’s was critical of the Supreme Court’s 5-to-4 decision to strike down laws that banned corporate spending in political finance systems. MSNBC analyzed the legislation of the decision to see how accurate Obama’s statement really was.

“The other thing that the president said is that corporations can spend without limits in our elections. It is true that they can, under the Supreme Court’s decision, spend as much as they want on advertising to support or oppose candidates, but of course they can’t contribute to candidates. So is that spending without limits? Well, people may disagree on this, David.”

ABC News looks at how past presidents have criticized the Supreme Court and what authority the Court's decision really has over the government.

“The Supreme Court has no direct authority to enforce its rulings. Think about it: There is no Supreme Court police force, or tax collection department, or other agency to see that its decisions are adhered to throughout the land….The court is, in that sense, powerless. Its only power… is "to say what the law is." It depends on the political branches to give effect to its rulings and maintain the rule of law in our country. It depends on that tradition of respect.”

But some say Alito’s reaction was natural, despite the Supreme Court’s expectation to remain emotionless during the State of the Union address. Here's The Volokh Conspiracy legal blog.

“There was absolutely nothing wrong with the president’s criticism of the court’s decision... But there was also absolutely nothing inappropriate about the justice’s reaction to him. Both the president and the justices are political actors, and all are entitled to screw up their faces and grumble in public as they see fit. Anyone who’s watched Alito at oral argument at the high court knows that he screws up his face and mutters to himself all the time. The suggestion that he was showboating or grandstanding last night is spectacularly unfair.”

So what do you think? Was Alito out of line for showing emotion, or is it just another part of the changing political times?

Writer: Liz Reed

Producer: Nathan Giannini