Letter: Supreme Court’s role disputed



During the last GOP debate of the year, Newt Gingrich stated that he would abolish federal courts and judges that make decisions he disagrees with. Gingrich took this unconstitutional idea a step further during a conference call with reporters by saying that he would blatantly ignore Supreme Court rulings that he disagreed with as well.

According to The Hill (Dec. 19, 2011), Gingrich told reporters that, as president, he will ignore the Supreme Court when they issue a ruling he disagrees with, suggesting that he would also ignore past rulings that the court has handed down throughout American history.

He said, “A commander in chief could simply issue instructions to ignore it, and say it’s null and void and I do not accept it because it infringes on my duties as commander in chief to protect the country.”

Now, given those facts, I have to disagree with Beverly Bonner’s criticism in her April 14 letter of President Obama’s comments about the Supreme Court. Considering the Republicans’ past position on the “activist judges,” any rational person would think that the Supreme Court would not overturn the new health care law, because that would be unconstitutional.

John R. Reid