Chris Christie Slams SCOTUS DOMA Ruling

P

pspr

Maybe he hasn't turned completely into a slithering Democrap.
----

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie slammed the Supreme Court decision on DOMA as “wrong” and an example of “judicial supremacy.”

Christie, a former federal prosecutor, made the remarks on his “Ask the Governor” radio show, hours after the U.S. Supreme Court struck a crucial section of the Defense of Marriage Act.

“I don’t think the ruling was appropriate,” said Christie, who is running for re-election in a blue state, one in which Democrats have hailed the SCOTUS decision on DOMA.

“I think it was wrong,” Christie continued, calling it “typical of the problem we see” in New Jersey’s own Supreme Court.

He blasted the U.S. Supremes for substituting “their own judgment for the judgment of a Republican Congress and a Democratic President. In the Republican Congress in the ‘90s and Bill Clinton. I thought that Justice Kennedy’s opinion was, in many respects, incredibly insulting to those people, 340-some members of Congress who voted for the Defense of Marriage Act, and Bill Clinton.”

“He basically said that the only reason to pass that bill was to demean people. That’s heck of a thing to say about Bill Clinton and about the Republican Congress back in the ‘90s. And it’s just another example of judicial supremacy, rather than having the government run by the people we actually vote for,” said Christie, who recently appeared with Clinton at a Clinton Global Initiative conference.

Clinton himself has walked away from the signing of DOMA, and in a statement said he was pleased with the court’s ruling.

Christie, who already vetoed a gay marriage bill in the past, has said he’d do the same with another one but also has called for a ballot referendum on the issue, and did again on the radio show.

“You’re talking about changing an institution that’s over 2,000 years old. Seems to me that, you know … the Democrats are putting an increase to the minimum wage on the ballot,” Christie said, noting Democratic opposition to a referendum. “That’s important enough to put on the ballot. But gay marriage is not. That’s something the people should decide, but not whether same-sex marriage should happen in New Jersey.”

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/chris-christie-doma-reaction-93483.html
 
Quote from pspr:

He blasted the U.S. Supremes for substituting “their own judgment for the judgment of a Republican Congress and a Democratic President. In the Republican Congress in the ‘90s and Bill Clinton. I thought that Justice Kennedy’s opinion was, in many respects, incredibly insulting to those people, 340-some members of Congress who voted for the Defense of Marriage Act, and Bill Clinton.”
More...

By that logic, where is his outrage of SCOTUS ruling the day before on the VRA when Congress voted 390-33 to renew it in 2006 in its current form.

By these statements of his, you can guess where he stands on the gay marriage issue that he once vetoed and promised to revist shortly.
 
Quote from JamesL:

By that logic, where is his outrage of SCOTUS ruling the day before on the VRA when Congress voted 390-33 to renew it in 2006 in its current form.

By these statements of his, you can guess where he stands on the gay marriage issue that he once vetoed and promised to revist shortly.
More...
He does seem to be arguing in support of Congressional and voter consensus instead of Constitutionality. I noticed that myself. That thinking is part of the problem we have now in government.
 
Guys, he's a loose cannon. I wouldn't trust him any more than the 2-3' I could throw him. A Rand Paul, I can trust. Christie, not a chance.
 
Quote from LEAPup:

Guys, he's a loose cannon. I wouldn't trust him any more than the 2-3' I could throw him. A Rand Paul, I can trust. Christie, not a chance.
More...
He looks more like a lose cannon ball than a lose cannon. :D
 
I think part of his argument that the Court just substituted its judgment for Congresses has an implicit flip side.

I think you could state that implicit to his argument is the flip side... that the Court should not be overruling laws unless they find a very serious constitutional violation and that DOMA does violate the constitution.
 
Quote from JamesL:

By that logic, where is his outrage of SCOTUS ruling the day before on the VRA when Congress voted 390-33 to renew it in 2006 in its current form.

By these statements of his, you can guess where he stands on the gay marriage issue that he once vetoed and promised to revist shortly.
More...

The so-called Voting Rights Act was a clearly unconstitutional measure that subjected a number of states to federal control of basic state duties entrusted to their sole discretion under the constitution. If there is voting discrimination, there are plenty of remedies. Treating some states as second class entities which must get Washington's approval to alter their laws or procedures stand federalism on its head. It is not activism to strike it down.

The fact that cowardly republicans voted for it rather than risk demagogic attacks has nothing to do with its constitutionality. The difference between the DOMA case and the VRA case is the difference between reading the actual Constitution and just issuing edicts with no constitutional basis.
 
What i find funny about all these supreme court rulings is that the left is always crying about how conservative the court is, when its the liberal justices who are a monolithic group, conservatives besides scalia regularly switch from side to side, when was the last time you ever saw someone like ginsburg cross the aisle on a ruling that was highly political?

I cant recall one.

The conservative justices make rulings based on the constitution, and the liberals just do whatever their ideology desires, this week was just more evidence of that. You can pretty much guarantee which way the liberal justices are going to vote every single time.
 
Quote from Max E. Pad:

What i find funny about all these supreme court rulings is that the left is always crying about how conservative the court is, when its the liberal justices who are a monolithic group, conservatives besides scalia regularly switch from side to side, when was the last time you ever saw someone like ginsburg cross the aisle on a ruling that was highly political?

I cant recall one.

The conservative justices make rulings based on the constitution, and the liberals just do whatever their ideology desires, this week was just more evidence of that. You can pretty much guarantee which way the liberal justices are going to vote every single time.
More...
Roberts is scared to death that his CJSCOTUS legacy will be defined by straight votes with the conservatives vs. the liberals and Kennedy's swing vote deciding the outcome of everything.

That's one of the possible arguments for his outrageous Obamacare vote.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top