Newt Gingrich is a Bully

Newt Gingrich is a smart guy and I have liked many things he has said over the years.  However, his willingness to throw democracy and the principles of good government under the wheels of his campaign bus as it swerves hard to the right is appalling.

Gingrich was in Iowa yesterday promoting his latest book and his potential presidential campaign.  Pushing the latest political hot-button, marriage, Gingrich said the integrity and authority of the system comes from the consent of the governed, “then the governed have indicated they don’t agree with this court … so I think they have any sense of integrity about protecting the court, they’ll step down.”

Wait.  What?

CHRISTOPHER GANNON/THE REGISTER

Gingrich’s statement is silly.   No, it is worse.  Gingrich has shown a reckless disregard for justice.  Having three separate and distinct branches of government provides an important balance.  The executive and legislative bodies are selected by regular and competitive elections.  These branches were meant to be responsive to the evolving priorities of the people.  Justice demands members of the Court consider the Constitution and laws of the land with a bit more distance from the influences of popular election.

Retention votes make sense.  The people should have the ability to remove judges they deem unfit for office, but judges should not be influenced to rule based on perceived popular opinion.

Gingrich’s statement is so outrageous it does not deserve comment, until you realize he could actually be a contender for the presidency.  Let’s deconstruct what he said.

First, Gingrich takes a huge leap in logic when he says voters would have tossed all of the Justices out had they been on the ballot.  He does not know that.  Polls indicate many of those voting “no” wanted to send a message.  If all of the justices were on the same ballot, it is fair to assume voters would have considered the potential chaos that could have ensued from the Supreme Court on down had all of the justices been tossed out.  A majority may not have voted “no” on the entire slate.  Balancing court continuity with the need for a public check is precisely why staggered terms for Justices were written into the Constitution.

Next, it is ludicrous to suggest this year’s vote should cause the remaining Justices to step down.  Following this flawed logic, all Republicans in the U.S. Senate who were not on the ballot should have resigned in 2008 to protect the integrity of Congress after the thumping their Party took that year.  Like Senators, Justices have terms that allow voters to consider a public servant’s entire record of service.  Had Gingrich resigned when he took a single vote in Congress that was unpopular, his career would have been considerably shorter.

A stable democracy demands a process of thoughtful consideration.   Voters have the opportunity to be heard from time to time, but that is different than knee-jerk mob rule.  Gingrich’s suggestion that Iowa’s remaining Supreme Court Justices step down looks less like democracy and more like a coup d’état where polls and the muscle of political groups substitute for guns and military strongmen.

Ejecting judges or forcing them to resign every time people disagree with a ruling will destroy a system designed to ensure each member of our society can find justice whether they have popular political support or not.

The Court acted in a legal manner and the marriage restriction was struck down.  Kicking Justices off the bench will not change that.  Democracy provides those who want sexually restrictive marriage a path to reverse the ruling.  They need to draft and pass laws and/or a constitutional amendment that withstand legal scrutiny.  That may be a painful and difficult task, but it is the way the process is supposed to work.

Replacing an independent judiciary with judges who will pander to win votes as Gingrich is should strike fear in all Iowans.  We all have a stake in preserving the ability of judges to do their jobs without being threatened by political bullies like Gingrich.

Justice prevails only if the people take a longer view than some guy who is singly focused on his fate in the next election.  Newt Gingrich may enjoy political racing, but he appears to not understand the fundamentals a stable and just society needs to survive.  He is wrong on this and he needs to steer his campaign vehicle in a different direction.

###

(Graham Gillette can be reached at grahamgillette@gmail.com)

This entry was first published as a Des Moines Register blog entry.