Subscribe to Breaking News
Loading ...Gingrich: Iowa ruling ‘judicial arrogance’
04.07.2009 4:23pm EDT
(Athens, Georgia) Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich says that a recent Iowa Supreme Court ruling legalizing gay marriage is “outrageously wrong.”
Gingrich spoke Tuesday at the University of Georgia’s law school, where he’s been teaching a series on the judicial system.Gingrich says that he was astonished by last Friday’s decision in the heartland state, and predicts a major battle over judicial power. He says the decision demonstrated “judicial arrogance.”
Gingrich is mentioned as a possible Republican presidential contender in 2012. He said Tuesday that any decision on a run was a year away. In the meantime, he’s been keeping a high profile advising Republicans on Capitol Hill.
Well now, this could prove interesting. I await with baited breath to hear what Mr. Newt has to offer as opinion regarding the legislative, non-judicial action of the Vermont Legislative assembly. The “peoples” representatives have spoken. Will Mr. Newt now declare them arrogant as well? If so, then by what logic can any law hold authority? The truth of the matter is, Newt, for all his supposed understanding of the law, has little to no legitimate standing on legal matters. The branches of the Government, as I understand them stateside, include the Courts. As some have pointed out, if we use Newts logic, all civil rights laws should be rescinded and offered up to popular vote…..I won’t hold my breath on that one happening soon. Bottom line, Right Wing Rethuglicans aren’t big believers in either Freedom or Democracy and they certainly don’t seem to be to concerned with the law either. They, like the dinosaurs, are slowly becoming extinct. Give it a couple of generations and I guarantee you, they will look back, scratch their heads and exclaim: “What the F*** were those people thinking”
If Judicial “activism” or “arrogance” had not been present in the 1950’s we’d still have segregated schools. But Repubs tend to forget that.
Gingrich has always been a hypocrite, and the only thing “outrageously wrong” is that he thinks anyone cares WHAT he thinks about anything !!!
The only thing more laughable is the likelihood of his becoming President, EVER, and not even GOD can help the Republicans on Capitol Hill if the best ‘guidance’ they can get is from Gingrich, who is “outrageously wrong” on just about everything, including breathing.
He’s such a opportunist..
This from a mindset that believes the judiciary exists to rubber stamp the will of the majority, or the perceived will of the majority.
He’s an idiot..
Suck it, Gingrich.
This from a man who has been married three times, and whose first wife, Jackie Battley, claims he discussed divorce terms with her while she was recuperating in the hospital from cancer surgery.
“recent Iowa Supreme Court ruling legalizing gay marriage is “outrageously wrong.”
Yeah, those damned activist judges supporting the Constitution from the bench.
Why does this website give cyberspace to a has-been atrocity like Newt Gingrich? To headline his quotes gives him validation and perpetuates his message. To ignore his blather diminishes his message and stills the message of prejudism that he espouses. I think this was a poor decision to run this story, especially on a day when there is much to be celebrated on the victory in Vermont.
I am always amazed, although it shouldn’t be a surprise any more, that Republicans seem to forget that there are 3 branches of government. Whenever the Supreme Court of a State or of this country makes a decision that the republicans don’t like, the first thing that is mentioned is those “activist judges”, or “legislating from the bench”, or “Judicial arrogance”… BS!
Its called “checks and balances” for a reason Newt. His day and style of partisan politics was in the mid 90’s. That entire era is being repudiated, let him continue to advise the a-hole holdovers, so we can vote them out too! The IOWA ruling was UNANIMOUS and left little question about what the justices thought. Thats not arrogant, that called CLARITY! WE WIN because it is the right thing, not a “political football” for some adulterous, 2 faced, mealy-mouthed hypocrite from a sad period of history that he had a big hand in creating. And now he wants us to go backward with him? No thanks. Now get back in the BACK SEAT of the bus and shut the hell up!
WOW! IOWA and VERMONT in the same week! God, if the weather was better there than Ohio, I’d be moving!
Politicians can disagree with the reasoning or the weight of evidence or the balancing of values done by the court, but to call the court “outrageously wrong” is dangerously irresponsible. The court only has it’s powers of logical persuasion of its demonstrated in its written opinions along with its reputation to carry out its responsibilities. When Newt demeans the court’s reputation, he harms our whole system of government. Taken to the end degree, that’s treason! Just as it was treasonous for Pres. Jackson to refuse to honor the US Sup Ct. decision on native rights in the 19th C which lead to the deaths of thousands in the trail of tears. An impotent court harms us all.
Ahh, Newt. I still remember the day that DC shut down because Newt had a tantrum. He decided it was more important to bring government to a screeching halt than to negotiate anything with either Bill Clinton or the Congressional Democrats. Yes, Newt, now that we’re deep in debt, deep in recession, deep in two wars we turned into unwinnable abysses–what do you want, you narcissistic fuck?
I know what I want. I want Newt and all his paleolithic fellow-travelers to crawl back under their rocks and stay there. Go turn into an oil deposit, and don’t come out ’til you have.
Leave it to an effin’ newt to say something like this! He is a pathetic fool from a pathetic loser state!
In my previous comment it says judges ruled in favour of the African American majority. I meant that judges ruled in favour of the African American MINORITY to end segregation. The fact remains that judges acted democratically and their rulings are accepted today.
Gee, Newt. Want some cheese with that whine?
It is unfortunate that Newt Gingrich, once the second or third most powerful person in the United States as Speaker of the House of Representatives does not understand that majority rule (as represented through elected representatives) alone does not represent democracy. In fact, mere majority rule is mob rule.
Democracy is majority rule, but only with full protections of the rights of minorities. Historically, the legislative branches of governments in Canada and the United States have acted very effectively to express a majority will but, due to the desire of legislators to be reelected, congress, parliament and state/provincial legislatures are less able to protect minority rights. However, our court systems, with judges free from constraints of seeking reelection, are free to carry out the other side of democracy– protecting minority rights.
This is not judicial arrogance. It is judges doing what they are supposed to do.
As a southerner, Mr. Gingrich must know that segregation, along with Jim Crow laws and measures to restrict voting rights, had majority support among qualified voters. It would still be in force to day except that courts ruled in favour of the African-American majority. Once segregation was actually abolished and people discovered the sky was not going to fall down, the majority learned to accept– even embrace– racial equality.
It will be the same thing with marriage equality. As people see that marriage equality for same-sex couples actually shows greater respect for the choice of a faithful covenant marriage between two people. I also believe that most heterosexual persons, desiring a faithful, fulfilling marriage, would not want to marry a Lesbian woman or Gay man anyway– any more than I, as a Gay many want to marry a heterosexual person of either sex.
Mr. Gingrich (and many other marriage equality opponents) would be wise to consider his (their) own past marital issues before telling Lesbians and Gay men who they have a right to marry or not marry.