There is a difference between asking a judge to testify so you can have the benefit of his wisdom and forcing him before Congress to justify a ruling you disagree with.
I understand. To be clear: If Mr. Gingrich is suggesting that Congress should have more power to compel testimony from judges than from other people, I disagree.
Whether or not the summons to testify before Congress is appropriate is really up to the voters to decide, during the next election cycle.
Ruling against the opinion of the executive and/or legislative branch is in fact not a crime.
Nobody said it was; and anyway that's not why people testify before Congress. People testify before Congress because Congress has the responsibility and the authority to inform itself regarding issues that it deems important.
Whether or not Congress deems the right things important is, again, up to the voters to decide during the next election cycle.
If a judge makes a ruling you disagree with, then you can take it to a higher court or wait until another opportunity to try the issue comes up with another judge. This is not new or secret.
If a judge makes a ruling *I* disagree with, sure. And when a judge makes a ruling *Congress* disagrees with?
I find the idea to be especially interesting, because Congress is responsible for making the laws that judges interpret. If the judge's interpretation is at odds with Congress's intent, then it seems to me that's worth looking into, if only to gain a better understanding of how to craft a law that better aligns legislative intent with judicial interpretation.
If a judge is suspected of unethical and/or illegal behavior, they can be impeached.
Mr. Gingrich's bloviating aside, not all disagreements between the legislative and the judiciary must stem from unethical or illegal behavior on the part of the judiciary. I don't see any reason why, in principle, the legislature shouldn't have intermediate options between "meek acceptance" and "impeach the bastard".
Now, as a separate issue, I may consider whether or not I want to have Mr. Gingrich, specifically, involved in any part of the Legislative/Executive/Judiciary process. Fortunately, I'm a voter, and there's an election cycle coming up, so I'll be able to register my opinion on
that issue in just a few short months.
I really should stick to just playing Dctr.
See what I mean jcp? They won't even let me pretend to be a historian.
