Well, this is a fun day. Rick Santorum is taking his turn as the non-Romney Republican choice. Rick Santorum. Yeah, that Rick Santorum — the self-same Rick Santorum who thinks Griswold was wrongly decided and wants to ban birth control — is now the “real conservative” alternate to Mitt Romney.

Ladies and gentlemen, I present your 2012 Republican Party.

This morning, the Wall Street Journal took a closer look at Rick Santorum’s thoughts on the Constitution and the judiciary. For those who haven’t been following the stellar career of Santorum (last seen getting absolutely waxed out of his Pennsylvanian Senate seat), let’s give him a look-see…

If you liked Newt Gingrich’s crazy views on the judiciary, you’re gonna love Santorum’s. From the WSJ Law Blog:

Fortunately for us, Santorum gave a policy speech in November on the [Constitution and the courts]. Dozens of people attended.

A lot of this will sound familiar. Newt Gingrich has been advocating proposals similar to Santorum’s — like abolishing the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit — for years…

At the time, the Pennsylvania Republican suggested that the Third Branch is less powerful than the other two, because it is mentioned third in the articles, after the legislative and executive branches. And since Congress has the authority to set up the inferior courts, it also has the right to get rid of them, he said.

“They can establish them, and if those courts violate the Constitution and do things that they should be stopped from doing, they have the power to repeal those courts, to abolish these courts,” Santorum said, according to TII.

But the best thing the WSJ dug up on Santorum is his big government views of the 10th Amendment. State’s rights? Irrelevant when it comes to the government’s power over what happens in the privacy of your bedroom:

In a Thanksgiving Family Forum, moderator Frank Luntz asked Santorum, “Should the states be able to say no to Washington?”

Santorum responded,

“I’m a very strong supporter of the 10th amendment…but the idea that the only things that the states are prevented from doing are only things specifically established in the Constitution is wrong.

Our country is based on a moral enterprise. Gay marriage is wrong. As Abraham Lincoln said, states do not have the right to do wrong. And so there are folks, here who said states can do this and I won’t get involved in that.

I will get involved in that because the states, as a president I will get involved because the states don’t have a right to undermine the basic fundamental values that hold this country together. America is an ideal. It’s not just a constitution, it is an ideal. It’s a set of morals and principles that were established in that declaration, and states don’t have the right, just like they didn’t have the right to do slavery.”

So, even if the states want Santorum, the central government should have some ability to stop Santroum. Oh, this is going to be fun.

Santorum Soundbites on the Judiciary, 10th Amendment [WSJ Law Blog]


comments sponsored by

76 comments (hidden for your protection) Show all comments