Gingrich Proposes Emasculating Supreme Court

All Republican candidates for the US Presidency at a recent press sponsored debate came out in favor of bringing back torture (e.g. waterboarding) but one, Ron Paul. But even Ron Paul and Mitt Romney favor Gingrich’s proposal to short circuit the independence of the US Supreme Court to interpret the federal Constitution.

Newt’s Poison Pill Prescription for US Supreme Court by Eric Posner

And he’s not the only one who thinks there is a huge problem with giving the Supreme Court final say on the Constitution. But make no mistake about it–should Mr. Gingrich’s plan succeed, it would place the remnant of our foundation for government as envisioned by the founders of this nation on the fast track slippery slope to fascism.

Supreme Court Executioner and Dilettante

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

All three branches (executive, legislative, judicial) were intended to be co-equal and independent from the others. This full faith and credit among those branches has essentially worked. Our justices give every respect to legislatively enacted laws UNLESS they’re clearly UNCONSTITUTIONAL. While nothing straight was ever carved from the crooked timbre of humanity, failing a benign theocracy, our man made laws and judge made rulings have reasonably consistently worked as the framers intended. Our courts have struggled to maintain not only the separation of powers, but the separation of Church and State…as was intended.

Our federal judges are not elected but SELECTED. The President proposes and the Senate disposes by advise & consent to those judicial nominations. The judges receive lifetime appointments precisely because they take their seats in the ONLY branch of our government without the corrupting influence of campaign contributions, corporate influence, graft, corruption, and high powered lobbyists.

Our judges are not supposed to be buffeted by popular sentiment or political winds. If our Constitution is difficult to amend, that’s as was intended. Those rights embodied in its text were  placed there to protect minority interests as the majority (in theory) in a democracy does not need such safeguards. Those principles held to be self evident were not intended to wax and wane with political intemperance. It’s for this very reason our US Senators have 6-year terms instead of the 2-year terms of House Representatives.

Were current popular political sentiment the only material warp and weave of our national fabric of government, there’d hardly be a need for a Constitution at all. That we have one which stands like a rock in the midst of chaotic political change serves to bind this nation, to provide continuity and an appropriate degree of certainty to individual liberty. commerce, and officials alike.

Gingrich, much like Donald Trump, is a political huckster seeking to anoint a simplistic rationale with the rhetoric of reasoned debate over issues long settled since at least 1803 when one of the early Supreme Court Justices ruled it was the Court’s sole purview to provide the ultimate interpretation of the Constitution–the document which acts as the glue to bind our nation of laws.  i.e. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!

Our rugged Constitution has served us well for these past centuries. It would be foolhardy to trade the empty rhetoric and overly simplistic vision of this demagogue for the tried and true cornerstone that has served as the foundation of our hard won democracy and system of government. What Gingrich proposes is no less than an invitation to a Constitutional crisis.

About admin

Opposed to politicians who equivocate about air quality & BioMassacre
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.