Carson: The President Wouldn't Have To Follow SCOTUS On Gay Marriage

[ClosedCaption]

Republican presidential candidate and tea party favorite Ben Carson said in an interview with Newsmax that the President of the United States doesn't have to follow the Supreme Court if the high court were to rule in favor of same-sex marriage.

"First of all, we have to understand how the Constitution works. The president is required to carry out the laws of the land, the laws of the land come from the legislative branch," Carsonsaid on Tuesday. "So if the legislative branch creates a law or changes a law, the executive branch has a responsibly to carry it out. It doesn’t say they have the responsibility to carry out a judicial law. And that's something we need to talk about."

Carson's comments follow the Supreme Court in April beginning to hear arguments inObergefell v. Hodges, which concerns bans on same-sex marriage in Kentucky, Ohio, Michigan, and Tennessee. The nine justices seemed to split along party lines in the early arguments. If the high court were to rule with the plaintiffs, gay marriage bans across the country could be wiped out in one single wave.

Carson, as Right Wing Watch which flagged the Newsmax interview noted, has signaled support for impeaching judges who favor same-sex marriage.

While some Republicans have grumbled about the possibility of the Supreme Court ruling in favor of gay marriage others, including Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R), have said that high court decision would have to be followed.



Carson seems a tad confused about how the Constitution actually works. He apparently thinks Brown v. Board of Educationand Roe v. Wade were just non-binding judicial decrees that had no legal standing. In his mind, the Supreme Court is only empowered to offer the power of suggestion, but the president doesn’t have to abide by Supreme Court rulings if he doesn’t want to.

Article III of the U.S. Constitution essentially grants the Supreme Court authority to be the final appellate court for determining the constitutionality of existing law. If the court deems an existing law unconstitutional, it becomes, by definition, unconstitutional. As a result, the court’s interpretation of the law is meant to govern the conduct of the American people, and the president, like every other American, is obliged to abide by the court’s ruling.

 

[ClosedCaption]

And this is why Ben Carson is running as a republican. Laws? Pbbbt...I dont like 'em so...yanno...I dont gotta listen to 'em lol

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I'm beginning to wonder, just how good a doctor was he? He can't think his way out of a wet paper bag.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

It;s already been demonstrated that the President can do whatever he like... Obama set that precedent.

See? We told you to be careful what you wish for because one day, it will turn against what you want.

 

[ClosedCaption]

It;s already been demonstrated that the President can do whatever he like... Obama set that precedent.

See? We told you to be careful what you wish for because one day, it will turn against what you want.

So full of accusations but so light with evidence

 

[Borillar]

He should stick to lancing boils and dispensing aspirin. At least he can do some good there.

 

[jknowgood]

Don't whine, Obama has given the presidency more power than it should have. I warned you dumbasses about it, but you were to busy polishing Obama's knob to see it. I told you then and I will tell you know. If Ben Carson gets elected, he will have the power to do pretty much what he wants to do. Thanks Obama, and closed shut up. If it was good for Obama, it's good for the republican president in 2016.

 

[SwimExpert]

Republican presidential candidate and tea party favorite Ben Carson said in an interview with Newsmax that the President of the United States doesn't have to follow the Supreme Court if the high court were to rule in favor of same-sex marriage.

"First of all, we have to understand how the Constitution works. The president is required to carry out the laws of the land, the laws of the land come from the legislative branch," Carsonsaid on Tuesday. "So if the legislative branch creates a law or changes a law, the executive branch has a responsibly to carry it out. It doesn’t say they have the responsibility to carry out a judicial law. And that's something we need to talk about."

Carson's comments follow the Supreme Court in April beginning to hear arguments inObergefell v. Hodges, which concerns bans on same-sex marriage in Kentucky, Ohio, Michigan, and Tennessee. The nine justices seemed to split along party lines in the early arguments. If the high court were to rule with the plaintiffs, gay marriage bans across the country could be wiped out in one single wave.

Carson, as Right Wing Watch which flagged the Newsmax interview noted, has signaled support for impeaching judges who favor same-sex marriage.

While some Republicans have grumbled about the possibility of the Supreme Court ruling in favor of gay marriage others, including Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R), have said that high court decision would have to be followed.



Carson seems a tad confused about how the Constitution actually works. He apparently thinks Brown v. Board of Educationand Roe v. Wade were just non-binding judicial decrees that had no legal standing. In his mind, the Supreme Court is only empowered to offer the power of suggestion, but the president doesn’t have to abide by Supreme Court rulings if he doesn’t want to.

Article III of the U.S. Constitution essentially grants the Supreme Court authority to be the final appellate court for determining the constitutionality of existing law. If the court deems an existing law unconstitutional, it becomes, by definition, unconstitutional. As a result, the court’s interpretation of the law is meant to govern the conduct of the American people, and the president, like every other American, is obliged to abide by the court’s ruling.

The funny (i.e. pathetic) thing is that Carson is absolutely right, for all the wrong reasons. It's true that if the SCOTUS rules gay marriage a constitutional right, the President does not have to comply. But the reason is that the President has no role whatsoever in marriages taking place.

 

[Steven_R]

"John Marshall has made his decision. Let him enforce it."
-Andrew Jackson

 

[PaintMyHouse]

"John Marshall has made his decision. Let him enforce it."
-Andrew Jackson

How'd that work out for him?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Don't whine, Obama has given the presidency more power than it should have..

More power doesnt equate ignoring the Supreme Court silly fucker

 

[The VOR]

I'm beginning to wonder, just how good a doctor was he? He can't think his way out of a wet paper bag.

I'd be surprised if he had any patients that lived.

 

[Steven_R]

"John Marshall has made his decision. Let him enforce it."
-Andrew Jackson

How'd that work out for him?

Considering the Jackson simply had the Army round up the Cherokee and ship them out west, I'd say Jackson got what he wanted.

The bottom line is there is nothing the courts can do if the President simply ignores them. I suppose they could try to serve a contempt of court warrant, but it really comes down to everyone just kind of agreeing the court's word is final. But push comes to shove, the court really has no teeth if either Congress or the White House simply decide to ignore the court.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

"John Marshall has made his decision. Let him enforce it."
-Andrew Jackson

How'd that work out for him?

Considering the Jackson simply had the Army round up the Cherokee and ship them out west, I'd say Jackson got what he wanted.

The bottom line is there is nothing the courts can do if the President simply ignores them. I suppose they could try to serve a contempt of court warrant, but it really comes down to everyone just kind of agreeing the court's word is final. But push comes to shove, the court really has no teeth if either Congress or the White House simply decide to ignore the court.

Yes, laws, who needs those damn things eh...

 

[Agit8r]

Anytime I hear Carson's political views, I can only think "Doctor heal thyself!"

 

[Syriusly]

Republican presidential candidate and tea party favorite Ben Carson said in an interview with Newsmax that the President of the United States doesn't have to follow the Supreme Court if the high court were to rule in favor of same-sex marriage.

"First of all, we have to understand how the Constitution works. The president is required to carry out the laws of the land, the laws of the land come from the legislative branch," Carsonsaid on Tuesday. "So if the legislative branch creates a law or changes a law, the executive branch has a responsibly to carry it out. It doesn’t say they have the responsibility to carry out a judicial law. And that's something we need to talk about."

Carson's comments follow the Supreme Court in April beginning to hear arguments inObergefell v. Hodges, which concerns bans on same-sex marriage in Kentucky, Ohio, Michigan, and Tennessee. The nine justices seemed to split along party lines in the early arguments. If the high court were to rule with the plaintiffs, gay marriage bans across the country could be wiped out in one single wave.

Carson, as Right Wing Watch which flagged the Newsmax interview noted, has signaled support for impeaching judges who favor same-sex marriage.

While some Republicans have grumbled about the possibility of the Supreme Court ruling in favor of gay marriage others, including Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R), have said that high court decision would have to be followed.



Carson seems a tad confused about how the Constitution actually works. He apparently thinks Brown v. Board of Educationand Roe v. Wade were just non-binding judicial decrees that had no legal standing. In his mind, the Supreme Court is only empowered to offer the power of suggestion, but the president doesn’t have to abide by Supreme Court rulings if he doesn’t want to.

Article III of the U.S. Constitution essentially grants the Supreme Court authority to be the final appellate court for determining the constitutionality of existing law. If the court deems an existing law unconstitutional, it becomes, by definition, unconstitutional. As a result, the court’s interpretation of the law is meant to govern the conduct of the American people, and the president, like every other American, is obliged to abide by the court’s ruling.

The funny (i.e. pathetic) thing is that Carson is absolutely right, for all the wrong reasons. It's true that if the SCOTUS rules gay marriage a constitutional right, the President does not have to comply. But the reason is that the President has no role whatsoever in marriages taking place.

Yep- the President can 'ignore' what the Supreme Court says- because the ruling would have no impact on the Presidency whatsoever.

 

[pismoe]

good history lesson StevenR , plus who needs a buncha unelected black robed judges running things for life anyway !!

 

[jknowgood]

Don't whine, Obama has given the presidency more power than it should have..

More power doesnt equate ignoring the Supreme Court silly fucker

Ignoring the constitution, is ignoring the supreme court, you stupid fuck.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Let's not forget that our system of Checks and balances has evolved and is codified to a greater degree than in the time of Jefferson and Jackson. Carson may not be up to the 20th century yet in his study of U.S. history.

 

[pismoe]

I don't think that matters , not to Carson anyway plus like I said , lots of people are getting annoyed with an unelected black robed rulers NO DOG . In the case that already been mentioned the 'supreme court' was simply ignored , I think !!