Gingrich Defends Supreme Court Criticisms

This transcript is automatically generated

I did tonight as you may know we interviewed Mitt Romney last night so it's only fair that we bring you need Gingrich this evening.

Latest CBS news poll has running game is tied at 20% nationwide among Republican primary voters to speaker joins us now.

From I'll.

So you may know that I criticized you last week.

You're saying that you would hold federal judges responsible for the decisions and that you may even bring the US marshalls in to bring them.

To Washington if you were president to explain what they're doing was I wrong in that criticism.

Well I think that -- basically the situation has asked about would be the equivalent of an impeachment.

And clearly an impeachment situation that congress has the authority under the constitution to -- the -- to show up so I was simply explaining.

The constitutional provision that exist which does allow the congress and circumstances.

Where they're questioning the judges to ensure that they show up but you know people blown this way out of proportion there are cases.

Where you have to rebalance the powers between the branches and and those cases the congress and the president have the authority.

To respond to the courts there is no Supreme Court over the president the congress that's a fundamental misunderstanding of the law.

And that's the key point I drove and we have a fifty some page Paper and -- dot org.

That outlines precedents to go back to Hamilton Madison Jefferson Jackson Lincoln and FDR so I think we have a pretty good case historically -- what I've laid out.

I think the mistake you made with all due respect is that you use -- little -- -- -- whatever his name in Texas who made an insane ruling.

That you can't say a man at a graduation.

Now look.

This guy was overturned he doesn't know what he's still win but you can't have congress involved with foolish decisions at that level and that's -- guy you pointed to.

So that's where people went wallow or not.

Well because -- It's not the government's business until it gets out of control they overturn the guy in ten seconds.

Now.

They didn't overturn an intense second because the school district thousands of thousand dollars you yourself just edit.

You have a judge sitting on the bench who -- who -- it and made an insane decision your language not mine.

Why the American people -- to tolerate an anti religious -- -- sitting on the bench.

Because under this system has a -- to neutralize that guy and he did.

You look -- and this is again with all due respect.

You came off his imperious in this and people have that perception of you any -- that if you were the president did do pretty much what the heck you wanna do.

-- and and people don't what what could've been -- I don't know.

Well.

-- first off the only case I indicated.

I would directly intervene as the commander in chief is is in the case of -- -- and where the courts have grotesquely over reached.

And suggested that American civil liberties extent a non two combatants on a battlefield.

That has never ever been part of the American system it is a grotesquely dangerous decision and I think the commander in chief has the responsibility.

To protect the United States in -- situation on the court has clearly gone too far and I agree and I think that's a case it's well worth debating.

I agree I agree and that's exactly -- -- point and Abraham Lincoln in your debate.

And then as you know I decide -- our best seller now about Lincoln what Lincoln did.

Was he issued executive orders.

Emancipation proclamation the most famous all right.

-- he challenged.

The Supreme Court to overturn him.

What are you -- he worked within this system he did and haul -- in which he could have done.

In front of congress is that you got on -- these people -- -- because they're saying that black men and women.

-- cattle are property could've done it but he work within the system.

Right.

But at the same time the other than the example of the -- and would relate directed -- -- and you're exactly right.

On the other hand the question of whether and I you have control of the judges oppresses goes back to Jefferson and Madison.

They eliminate eighteen out of 35 federal judges over half the federal judges.

Are abolished so all I'm suggesting I'm not argue for specific case although I do think -- -- -- -- clearly vividly.

Anti religious bigot.

That he ought to at least be looked ahead.

But all I'm suggesting is.

There are ways for the congress and the president to rebalance the system.

You don't have to tolerate judges running over our liberties in ways that are very dangerous okay now law.

Watch Live

Gingrich Defends Supreme Court Criticisms

Details

Clips

Editor's Picks

Okla. Gov. Fallin: We're strong and we'll rebuild

House of Scandals: Where was Obama?

Tea Party group sues IRS for political profiling

State Dept. official says he was 'scapegoat' for Benghazi

Gutfeld: Media still cast Tea Party as villains, not victims

Sen. Paul: 'Someone has to be fired' over IRS scandal

Search, rescue efforts still underway at tornado-hit school

Survivor: Family will 'stay together and just rebuild'

Scandals affecting public opinion of Obama administration?

Oklahoma: How you can help rescue teams on the ground

First responders raise flag after devastating tornado

Moore, Oklahoma resident: 'God, protect me. Protect me'

Transcript

Recommended