Gingrich rails at courts, suggests ignoring rulings | McClatchy Washington Bureau

×
Sign In
Sign In
    • Customer Service
    • Mobile & Apps
    • Contact Us
    • Newsletters
    • Subscriber Services

    • All White House
    • Russia
    • All Congress
    • Budget
    • All Justice
    • Supreme Court
    • DOJ
    • Criminal Justice
    • All Elections
    • Campaigns
    • Midterms
    • The Influencer Series
    • All Policy
    • National Security
    • Guantanamo
    • Environment
    • Climate
    • Energy
    • Water Rights
    • Guns
    • Poverty
    • Health Care
    • Immigration
    • Trade
    • Civil Rights
    • Agriculture
    • Technology
    • Cybersecurity
    • All Nation & World
    • National
    • Regional
    • The East
    • The West
    • The Midwest
    • The South
    • World
    • Diplomacy
    • Latin America
    • Investigations
  • Podcasts
    • All Opinion
    • Political Cartoons

  • Our Newsrooms

You have viewed all your free articles this month

Subscribe

Or subscribe with your Google account and let Google manage your subscription.

National

Gingrich rails at courts, suggests ignoring rulings

William Douglas - McClatchy Newspapers

December 17, 2011 03:33 PM

WASHINGTON — Picking up where he left off in last Thursday's Republican presidential debate, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich on Saturday continued to rail against the federal judicial system, accusing it of overstepping its constitutional role and arguing that the president and Congress can ignore court decisions.

In a conference call with reporters that sounded alternately like a campaign pitch and a law school lecture, Gingrich said, "The courts are too aggressive, and the courts have been trying to impose an elitist value system on a country that's inherently not elitist."

"The founding fathers were very distrustful of judges," Gingrich went on. "Saw them as an elite instrument of government designed to oppress the people. And, as a result, (they) consciously made the judicial branch the third branch and the weakest branch."

In order to restore balance between Congress, the White House, and the courts, Gingrich recommended ignoring rulings, impeaching judges, subpoenaing justices to have them explain their rulings and, as a last resort, abolishing the courts altogether.

Gingrich, whose lead heading into next month's Iowa caucuses has slipped recently, cited presidents Abraham Lincoln and Andrew Jackson as White House occupants who chose to ignore major court rulings.

Gingrich said part of his drive to curb judges stems from a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in 2002 that reciting the phrase, "One nation, under God," in the Pledge of Allegiance infringed on the separation of church and state.

"I was frankly just fed up with elitist judges imposing secularism on the country and fundamentally changing the American Constitution," Gingrich told reporters, adding that "it was clear to me that you have a judicial psychology run amok, and there has to be some method of bringing balance back to the three branches."

Gingrich reserved most of his ire for U.S. District Court Judge Fred Biery, who issued a ruling last June that banned prayer at a high school graduation ceremony near San Antonio, Texas. The judge said that school district officials had to inform commencement speakers that they could talk about religion and their personal beliefs but they couldn't pray or call on the audience to pray.

A three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Biery's ruling but the case still left Gingrich seething and contemplating changes to the judicial system that would "indicate to the judges that there are clearly powers that historically have been used that are totally outside any conversation."

"Take Judge Biery. It is easier and more practical simply to impeach him because it is a less radical step, but it's also useful for folks to understand that in fact in American history, in the period when you still had members of the Constitutional convention in the government, they, in fact, abolished courts."

Gingrich's approach to the judiciary has been dismissed by several liberal and conservative legal experts.

"I don't believe it makes a lot of sense to have Congress overseeing justices," former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney said, adding that Congress has even "less credibility."

MORE FROM MCCLATCHY

Iowa GOP race is wide-open, and anyone might win

Herman Cain says he'd like to be secretary of defense

Gingrich comes under attack in last debate before Iowa caucuses

For more McClatchy politics coverage visit Planet Washington

Read Next

Congress

’I’m not a softy by any means,’ Clyburn says as he prepares to help lead Democrats

By Emma Dumain

December 28, 2018 09:29 AM

Rep. Jim Clyburn is out to not only lead Democrats as majority whip, but to prove himself amidst rumblings that he didn’t do enough the last time he had the job.

KEEP READING

MORE NATIONAL

Elections

California Republicans fear even bigger trouble ahead for their wounded party

December 27, 2018 09:37 AM

Congress

‘Remember the Alamo’: Meadows steels conservatives, Trump for border wall fight

December 22, 2018 12:34 PM

National Security

Israel confounded, confused by Syria withdrawal, Mattis resignation

December 21, 2018 04:51 PM

Guantanamo

Did Pentagon ban on Guantánamo art create a market for it? See who owns prison art.

December 21, 2018 10:24 AM

Congress

House backs spending bill with $5.7 billion in wall funding, shutdown inches closer

December 20, 2018 11:29 AM

White House

Trump administration wants huge limits on food stamps — even though Congress said ‘no’

December 20, 2018 05:00 AM
Take Us With You

Real-time updates and all local stories you want right in the palm of your hand.

McClatchy Washington Bureau App

View Newsletters

Subscriptions
  • Newsletters
Learn More
  • Customer Service
  • Securely Share News Tips
  • Contact Us
Advertising
  • Advertise With Us
Copyright
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service