I know the Supreme Court sometimes gets things wrong, and the Ninth Circuit is just awful. The remedy, in my opinion, is electing more conservatives who will appoint better judges. But Newt Gingrich thinks it would be a good idea to give presidents the power to simply ignore SCOTUS decisions they don’t like, and drag Justices before Congress to explain the reasoning behind their rulings.
Two former attorneys general under President George W. Bush have found a few things to like in Newt Gingrich’s position paper on reining in the authority of the federal courts, but other parts, they say, are downright disturbing.
Some of the ideas are “dangerous, ridiculous, totally irresponsible, outrageous, off-the-wall and would reduce the entire judicial system to a spectacle,” said former Attorney General Michael Mukasey.
n a 28-page position paper entitled, “Bringing the Courts Back Under the Constitution,” Gingrich argues that when the Supreme Court gets it wrong constitutionally, the president and Congress have the power to check the court, including, in some cases, the power to simply ignore a Supreme Court decision.
“Our Founding Fathers believed that the Supreme Court was the weakest branch and that the legislative and executive branches would have ample abilities to check a Supreme Court that exceeded its powers,” he argues.
Mukasey and Alberto Gonzales, in exclusive interviews with Fox News’ Megyn Kelly, said they are particularly alarmed by provisions such as allowing Congress to subpoena judges after controversial rulings to “explain their constitutional reasoning” to the politicians who passed the laws. (Read More)
Here’s the video. The first thing that comes to mind is Obamacare and how the SCOTUS will rule on the constitutionality of that law. What if Obama wins reelection a his signature legislation is struck down by the Court? Does Newt think it would be okay for him to simply ignore the ruling?
Related: Ann Coulter’s latest column – Newt: Speak Bombastically and Carry a Tiny Stick