Newt Gingrich: Abolish Liberal, 'Anti-American' Courts

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich went off on the American judicial system during Thursday night's GOP debate, saying courts have become "grotesquely dictatorial, far too powerful and ... frankly arrogant in their misreading of the American people."

Gingrich has called for the abolition of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which is despised by conservatives for many of its liberal rulings.

Referencing the Ninth Circuit, Gingrich said that judges who believe the phrase "One nation, under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance violates the separation of church and state are "radically Anti-American" and should not be wearing the robe.

"I taught a short course in this at the University of Georgia Law School, and I testified in front of sitting justices at Georgetown Law School and I warned them, 'You keep attacking the core base of the American exceptionalism, and you will find an uprising against you which will rebalance the judiciary.' We have a balance of three branches -- not a judicial dictatorship in this country. ... I will be prepared to take on the judiciary if it in fact did not restrict itself in what it was doing."

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) said she agreed with Gingrich that the judiciary has become too powerful. She said it was up to Congress and the president to take the power back.

"Because now we have gotten to the point where we think the final arbiter of law is the court system. It isn't. The intention of the founders was that the courts would be the least powerful system of government. And if we give to the courts the right to make law, then the people will have lost their representation. They need to hold onto their representation."

Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) also advocated against abolishing courts and allowing Congress to subpoena judges to account for their decisions, as Gingrich suggested, saying it may "open up a can of worms."

"Yes, we are frustrated with this," he said. "But the whole thing is if you just say, 'Well, we are going to -- okay, there are 10 courts. Let's get rid of three this year because they ruled a way we didn't like.' That to me is, I think, opening up a can of worms for us and would lead to trouble. But I really, really question this idea that the Congress could subpoena judges and bring them before us. That is a real affront to the separation of the powers."

Comments

[Alexander DeWolf]

08:03 PM on 12/20/2011

Welcome to the new Christian Theocracy. We are getting no better than any other (Muslim or whatever faith) theocracy. Sorry, GOP/TP the majority of Americans don't want a theocracy. Stop telling us how to think.

[Jerry Aripez]

10:16 AM on 12/19/2011

This guy is just plain nu_ts....

[Jerry Aripez]

10:14 AM on 12/19/2011

Sounds like Newt has failed since his job is to protect the Constitution of the United States and he is preaching fas_cisma nd talking about being a trai_tor of the country...Yep you tbaggers really know hat and how to support when it comes to a dic_tator....

[Larri Brady McKnight]

11:31 AM on 12/18/2011

Newt is confused. As a body, Congress is charged with the writing of laws. The courts are charged with the interpretation of such laws, and in deciding if the laws Congress makes are Constitutional. The Courts may seem more powerful now. The problem is not that the Court system IS indeed more powerful, it's that Congresses, both Federal and State, seem to pass many more laws that are Constitutionally questionable. (at the very least, if not Unconstitutional altogether.) If the Congress of the United States would pay more attention to the Constitution, then the Courts wouldn't have so much "Power."

[pammity]

12:38 AM on 12/18/2011

"BECAUSE I DON'T LIKE IT" Paul's reason to get rid of them. Well, tough get over it. And Gingrich , wanting it to be more in line with his views on religion, is just stupid, people worship in many ways.

Like a poster said though, it's packed with republithugs and when they steal the presidency or rule that a "thing" is a person in order to get rich, that can't be right.
Judges should not need to have many watchdogs to keep them from totally selfish rulings, they should pass a test of character, or morality test before being appointed.

[genfair]

12:39 PM on 12/18/2011

Paul didn't say to get rid of them because "I don't like it". He said getting rid of the courts because "I don't like it" would "open up a can of worms".

[Marc Lewis]

06:51 PM on 12/17/2011

Notice that this attack is focused on the 9th Circuit. It reminds me of the purge of non-party Judges during the Nazi Party (NSDAP) rise to power in Hitler's Germany, that was part of an internal take over of all the political machinery by the Nazi's. The part about "One Nation Under God" was a late addition to the 'Pledge' (after WWII if memory serves) and only around 1900 did the motto "In God We Trust" appear on US currency (first appearance was on the $20 gold piece and was then removed by order of Teddy Roosevelt, making the $20 'Godless Motto' pieces a rarity). Newt, knowing these things full well, arrogantly assumes that the public will be unaware of the historical parallels. On the other hand, he may have been just a very crappy history teacher.

[rbrain]

09:33 PM on 12/17/2011

fantastic post, fanned and faved

[silverspirit2011]

07:01 AM on 12/18/2011

What I really want to ask these numb-nuts, is do they believe in the separation of church and state, and what they think it means. Second thoughts, I rather not. I know what the answer would be...

[markpkessinger]

03:21 PM on 12/17/2011

I agree, Newt! The judicial branch has too often to itself too much power. Nowhere was this more evident than in the cases of Bush v. Gore and Citizens United.

[pkatcher]

02:47 PM on 12/17/2011

NEWT want the laws and rules aligned by his NEW CATHOLIC FAITH let the POPE decide everything

WRONG..the US IS secular..NOT a christain or any other religion country....READ the damn constitution you wing nnuts NO RELIGION WILL BE USED AS A TEST OF ELECTED OFFICALS....ofcourse TP member s CANNOT READ

[tmachine2]

02:23 PM on 12/17/2011

Hey, let's also ban conservative, corporately controlled courts, too. It's funny...the most anti-American people I know are rightwingers...

[Fan Tastic]

12:59 PM on 12/17/2011

anything the republican­s don't agree with become "anti-Amer­ican"!

Hint - republican­s... you may think you own America... but you don't!”

[Jerry Aripez]

10:17 AM on 12/19/2011

They only just became back in power and theri little heads swell up and they want to stick it to everyone....little dic_ktators....

[moral without religion]

10:46 AM on 12/17/2011

I'm posting this because it's so important. Get rid of the ninth circuit court and the rulings favoring the constitutional concept of separation of church and state go away.
The revisionists and dominionists will have at our secular constitution and here comes a theocracy disguised in family values and Christian morals, whatever they are over secular morals.
Fight back by joining one or more "organizations for the separation of church and state and supporting them." (internet search) If your local schools can't stay away from Christian prayers or if your local government has Christian only prayers at meetings and Christian only Christmas displays on city property then I suggest the The Freedom From Religion Foundation.
An example of the meaning of the first amendment written by Jefferson for a state can be seen here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Statute_for_Religious_Freedom

[Bernard Gabriel Pelaire]

11:51 PM on 12/16/2011

Obscene pandering to the know-nothings. Hey, Michele, Constitution has courts as final arbiter. Newt, how about removing Scalia and Thomas for electing George W Bush, whose father and running mate are Scalia's golfing buddies... Thomas's wife heads or is a director of companies and "institutes" whose business comes before the court. And so on. If there's any bias, it's on the Supreme Court. Look at "Citizens United."

[techie20032000]

09:39 PM on 12/16/2011

Gimme a P Gimme a A Gimme N Gimme a D Gimme a E Gimme a R Gimme a I Gimme a N Gimme a G Whata you got? A GOP President Elect Campaign.

[NancyY]

11:14 AM on 12/17/2011

Pandering to whom? Do you think that Obama's campaign wasn't all about pandering? Oh, please. I heard voice segments from radio talk shows and video segments as well, where fools were thinking such things as, "If Obama get elected, we won't have to pay for gas", and "If Obama gets elected, I won't have to pay on my mortgage anymore". Obama didn't start such silly rumors, but he was happy to bask in the glory of them.

[tmachine2]

02:33 PM on 12/17/2011

what planet are you from?

[pkatcher]

02:49 PM on 12/17/2011

wow sound bites make up your alleged mind poor thing TRY hearing and reading ENTIRES SENTENCES I knwo it hurts but it is good for your brai nt o LEARN REALITY

[tmachine2]

02:26 PM on 12/17/2011

The key is "gimme." The rightwinger are the ones that really feel that they are entitled to patriotism and the money. Newt and his cronies make me want to chunk.

[K August]

09:11 PM on 12/16/2011

I wonder how much of the media will discuss this wild idea by newt?
I wonder if his approval rating will decline?..........anyone wanting to tamper with one of the 3 branches of government for political gain....... that's just insane and they shouldn't be allowed anywhere NEAR the WH!

[pkatcher]

02:50 PM on 12/17/2011

BUT remember the TP elected to READ the constitution after the last elections? BUT the yleft out parts like THREE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT LIKE SECULAR NATION>..NO OFFICAL RELIGION, LIKE having a brain

[miketothad]

09:08 PM on 12/16/2011

It seems if you want anything demonized in "conservative" world, just call it "liberal".
Pretty soon, libraries will be "liberal".
Hell, they already convinced their right wing 1d.1.0.t base that evolution and global warming are up for debate, and that tax cuts for millionaires create jobs.

[Kate McCloud]

01:59 PM on 12/17/2011

I've thought the same. When did investment in infrastructure and education (foundational blocks to a great nation) become "liberal spending"?
You gotta invest in both those things so that our precious "capitalist " system can function. Commerce and trade depend on reliable transport and labor.

[tmachine2]

02:27 PM on 12/17/2011

Italian Fascism, such as German National Socialism; any right-wing nationalist ideology or movement with an authoritarian and hierarchical structure that is fundamentally opposed to democracy and liberalism.

3.

prejudice in relation to the subject specified