Posted on 12/18/2011 12:34:01 PM PST by EveningStar
GOP presidential frontrunner Newt Gingrich said Congress has the power to dispatch the Capitol Police or U.S. Marshals to apprehend a federal judge who renders a decision lawmakers broadly oppose...
Gingrich made his remarks during a Sunday appearance on CBS’s “Face the Nation” where he defended his position that the president has the power to eliminate federal courts to disempower judges who hand down decisions out of step with the rest of the nation...
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
I think that is correct actually, they appoint-confirm them they can revoke their confirmation....
We all think it is fine and good until the Dems control congress and use this power.
This is another one of those cases where Newt should have ended his thought process two sentences before he did.
Could not agree more.Why would he ever say such nonsense? His candidacy is falling apart.
I don’t think the Founding Fathers ever intended for “judges” and “courts” to have the power that they have today. The “judges” should not have the final say in the decisions made by the people of the United States and their elected officials. Where is it written that the “judges” and their “courts” are the Mother of All Trump Cards? A lot of “judges” are out of control and it’s time to rein them in. JMO.
In what way is judicial activism (as we have seen it since the Warren court) not judicial misconduct as understood in the same common law standards that protect judges from a subpoena?
U.S. Constitution: Fourteenth AmendmentSection. 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
As President, he would have nothing to do with the decision of a Congressional committee to question a judge or two.
Newt is making it known that he will support Congressional efforts to curb the courts. For instance, if a Tea Party Congress voted to disestablish the Ninth Circus and start over, he would sign that bill. Congress could define the right to select one’s doctor as a Ninth Amendment right that the courts could not review, and Newt would sign it. Without pushback, the courts will continue to run roughshod over our Constitution.
I try to not appreciate Newt, but as President he would encourage Congress to use their Article III powers. Good on him.
Looks like Newt has made a huge mistake.
If Newt really said this he is unfathomably stupid.
Why not impeach rogue judges. Can they be impeached?
Did you read the article or just comment on the headline?
I personally no longer see any use or need for judges in this country.
I don’t need some other idiot human telling me a damn thing, law degree or no law degree.
We’ve given these people too much power, they have abused it utterly, it is now time to take that power back.
I like what he said and I want to like Gingrich but I keep thinking of all that money he took from Freddie Mac.
Gingrich has made his (correct) point, but now that it is made, he should change the subject and talk about another reform or, more specifically, removing barriers to job creation.
In the general election, Obama’s best strategy is to run on the “check and balance” theme to avoid the Republicans controlling the House, Senate and White House. Independents may buy this line, especially if Gingrich threatens the Judicial Branch.
We are in this to win — not make ideologically correct speeches and then lose.
Imperial Newt is not news. He was and always has been.
It wasn’t that long ago when the GOP held all three branches of Govt.
Why wasn’t it done then? When they had the power to do it, why wasn’t done?
Correction ... see post 27
Well now, that is a lot different then just sending police to take out a judge because he was abusive.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.