Social Question

elbanditoroso's avatar

Can someone (preferably a Gingrich-ite) explain how Newt would decide which decisions would put which judges in jail?

Asked by elbanditoroso (15193 points ) December 19th, 2011

Newtie says that he will put judges in jail if they rule on issues that he disagrees with. OK, that’s unconstitutional and a step towards dictatorship, fine. But let’s follow the idea through.

How will Newt decide which supreme court (and appeals court) rulings to ignore? On what basis (i.e. charge) will the judges be held? If the decisions are treasonous, as Newt implies, why not simply put the judges to death, since the penalty for treason is capital.

What happens if there is new president elected who disagrees with Newt? Will a new set of judges be jailed? What happens to the old ones already in jail?

Newt Gingrich is a dangerous maniac for suggesting these things.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

19 Answers

zenvelo's avatar

One can’t answer what would upset Newt to the point he would jail a judge, because he shifts his opinions from day to day. He is inconsistent in his “beliefs” because he tends to make a lot of off the cuff remarks and he shoots from the hip.

Ron_C's avatar

Gingrich is a first class blowhard. The fact that he is highly educated allows him t phrase things so that it takes a while for the listener to deconstruct his current message.

I notice that all of the candidates either don’t know that the presidents powers are limited or intent to move us closer to a dictatorship. After-all that is what Bush and Cheney did. Ron Paul is the only different candidate. He wants to deconstruct government so that it is useless and we revert to a Darwinist society where the strongest survive and the weakest descend into slavery or just die.

I see nothing good coming from the right.

bkcunningham's avatar

@elbanditoroso, you will have to show me where Newt said he’ll imprison judges if they rule on issues that he disagrees with.

marinelife's avatar

Yes, he is a dangerous maniac. But this is the kind of “old Newt” talk that we need to disqualify him as a candidate.

GoldieAV16's avatar

@bkcunningham On one of the Sunday news shows, Gingrich was asked what he would do if a judge was subpoenaed to appear before Congress on a ruling, and refused. He said that yes, he would have them arrested (ie taken into custody, imprisoned).

CWOTUS's avatar

I think he was just talking through his hat in that case, @GoldieAV16. Congress enforces its own subpoenas. They wouldn’t take kindly to the executive attempting to horn in on that. So that was just posturing. Like every presidential candidate always does when he says what “he” will do, what “he” will “give us”, etc.

zenvelo's avatar

@bkcunningham Here he says he would arrest Judges he (Gingrich) thought “were out of line.” That’s Gingrich’s opinion he is talking about.

He is arrogant and a traitor to the Constitution.

Qingu's avatar

I would like to see the direct quote from Gingrich about this.

filmfann's avatar

@Qingu Look here at 9:15

Qingu's avatar

Can’t watch videos; can ye poast the quote verbatim?

Jaxk's avatar

First I would like to state, his position is a bad solution to a real problem. The idea that Justices would be arrested is merely a response to the situation where they refused to comply with a subpoena from congress. Same as anyone else. The Justice department is chartered with enforcement of congressional subpoenas and that is the only place where the president would have any involvement.

We can all go back through Supreme Court rulings and find places where they simply screwed up. Dred Scott is one of those decisions we could all agree on, but there are many more. Wickard v. Filburn is one of my personal favorites for this category. So what do we do when the courts create law that is distinctly against our constitution and our best interest?

The truth is we already have remedies. We can rewrite the law or change the constitution by amending it. This of course would only pertain to the most egregious errors but that’s probably appropriate. Gingrich’s solution is a bit over the top but it’s not the first time that a president has tried to screw with the courts. FDR tried to pass a law that would allow him to appoint an additional 6 judges to the supreme court. This would allow him to get the rulings he wanted. It didn’t work. Nor will Gingrich’s plan to monkey with the courts.

HungryGuy's avatar

I would say that any politician in congress who votes in favor of a law (and/or President who ratifies it) that is subsequently ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court be charged with treason.

El_Cadejo's avatar

@Qingu
“You say if you don’t like what a court has done, that congress should subpoena the judge, bring him before congress, and hold a Congressional hearing. Some people say that’s unconstitutional, but I’ll let that go for a minute. I just want to ask you from a practical standpoint how would you enforce that? Would you send the capital police down to arrest him?”
“If you had to… or you’d instruct the Justice Department to send a US Marshall….”

Qingu's avatar

I see. Yeah fuck that guy.

tesuque528's avatar

I wouldn’t put much stock into what Gingrich says. After all, anyone who combines book selling with running for the presidency is not a serious candidate.

CWOTUS's avatar

Yeah, like Obama. Good example.

plethora's avatar

I’m not a great fan of Gingrich. But neither do I think he is a dolt. @Jaxk comments above pretty well hit the nail on the head. I would just note that Bill Clinton, who does happen to be one of my favorites, had good words to say about Newt on the O’Reilly Factor last night. Not that he would vote for him, but that the guy is very smart and that he was a pleasure to work with when Clinton was in the White House.

Qingu's avatar

LOL, I bet Clinton said that because he wants Gingrich to win the nomination.

plethora's avatar

@Qingu Could be, but it did not appear to be said in that spirit. Clinton, to me, usually seems to say what he means and means what he says. And I neither want nor expect Gingrich to get the nomination. He does shoot off his mouth.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther