Obama wasn’t asked, but Robert Gibbs implied that the president had read the law and then, after the issue was raised and time had passed, Gibbs claimed that the president had read it.
It certainly wouldn’t be the first time that Obama shot off about something without the facts. For example, remember his asserting, without the facts, that “the police acted stupidly”? A subsequent investigation found that both the police and the professor were equally to blame.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rH1FEcbi4A
http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/arizona-to-obama-read-the-damn-law/question-1028419/
May 19, 2010: “So earlier this week trouble-making reporters asked White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs if the Smoker in Chief, another strong critic of the state law, had…..read the legislation. And Gibbs said he thought Obama had asked his lawyers for information on the bill.
Which, of course, doesn’t really answer the question. It’s primo White House-speak for ‘probably not but I don’t want to admit it.’”
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/05/janet-napolitano-arizona-illegal-immigrants-jan-brewer.html
May 20, 2010: Obama has [by now] read the Arizona immigration law reported Gibbs
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2010/05/obama-has-read-the-arizona-immigration-law/1
The picture that emerges is that is of an administration that jumps to opinions without first getting or reading the facts. A logical conclusion is that the administration acts not on the basis of evidence but on political calculations.