Horse manure.
This guy is with the CATO Institute? Yikes.
The US Constitution offers a fairly sparse job description for the Supreme Court, especially compared to the other two branches. Most of the "power" the Supreme Court now has it took for itself along the way. Shame on those who let it happen, who let the courts embed themselves at the top of the government food chain to the point where, for example, a single scumbag in black can overrule millions of referendum or ballot initiative voters.
Gingrich simply wants to (finally!) bring the judiciary back to the coequal branch of government status it was supposed to have from the beginning. I'm pretty sure the framers never intended for the judiciary to legislate from the bench or govern by fiat.
Bravo for Newt. And to hell with the CATO Institute if they can't do better than Roger Pilon. Apparently even a layman like me knows more about the Constitution than he does.
BenKenobi.
Fears to use the force he does.
VP of legal affairs. Probably a lawyer. I've noticed that the most virulent critics of Gingrich's proposals regarding reigning in the court are lawyers.
Which leads to an interesting question -- are they in fact the experts in the matter whose opinions should be considered over a non-lawyer politician's position, or are they so indoctrinated in the "power of the courts" that the suggestion simply destroys their worldview?