Tag Archives: Bill of Rights

Newt Gingrich to ignore courts if elected

Newt Gingrich made headlines again on December 18 that if he is elected, he will ignore some of the Supreme Court rulings that conflict with his decision. He is also willing to impeach judges and abolish certain courts if they continue to disagree with him.

Reading the Bill of Rights, three out of the ten amendments deal with judges and the judiciary system, and it implies that the judiciary plays a very important role in keeping the government in check. The amendments are as follows, per Wikipedia:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

I do not know if this rhetoric is to gain momentarily public attention, or gain fringe votes, however it is a dangerous and foolish precedent by any presidential candidate. I believe that any candidate that is willing to dismiss the judiciary and does not believe in upholding the rule of law should not be discussed seriously. Imagine such a candidate being chosen as a president, then there will be severe ramifications as to what constitutes the rule of law? It will essentially be like any other dictatorship, as we have seen in the Arab Springs.

What are your thoughts?



Gingrich causes a stir with vow to ignore courts (SMH)