Mike Huckabee speaking at Northwestern College in Orange City, IA. Photo credit: Dave Davidson (Prezography.com)
Mike Huckabee speaking at Northwestern College in Orange City, IA<br>Photo credit: Dave Davidson – Prezography.com
Mike Huckabee speaking at Northwestern College in Orange City, IA<br>Photo credit: Dave Davidson - Prezography.com
Mike Huckabee speaking at Northwestern College in Orange City, IA
Photo credit: Dave Davidson – Prezography.com

Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee is taking some heat for suggesting that the Supreme Court has no authority to make laws, but only to interpret them, though this is taught in about every school in the country. It is called “the balance of powers”. The legislative branch makes laws, the executive branch enforces the law, and the judicial branch interprets the laws. All must follow the Constitution.

Among those opposing Huckabee’s view are David Graham at The Atlantic, who suggested that the result might be another civil war, and Jazz Shaw at Hot Air who says, “Huckabee is taking this in a rather startling and difficult to defend direction,

The idea that the Supreme Court is the supreme law of the land, however, is repugnant to the idea that the three branches are co-equal. If that idea were so, there would be no need for the other two branches.  However, Democrats (and sometimes Republicans) expect the Supreme Court to make the laws. George W Bush did this when he signed the most recent Campaign Finance Law overhaul. He defended the “bad” parts of the law, saying he was confident the Supreme would fix it.  They did not, at least until 2010, when the Citizens United case came down supporting the notion that contributions to candidates and PACs amount to the exercise of free speech.

Huckabee asks this rhetorical question in his interview with Mike Wallace of Fox News:

“Then, what if the Supreme Court ruled they were going to make the decision as to who was going to be the next president and save the taxpayers and voter from all the expense and trouble of voting?

The current meme is what the Supreme Court did in the 2000 election race (Bush v. Gore). But an “official recount” by the National Opinion Research Center, of the disputed counties in Florida that Vice-President Gore had asked for, would have still made Bush the winner. In other words, had the Supreme Court allowed Florida to finish its umpteenth recount, Bush would have won anyway.

“Attorney for the Landmark Foundation, Mark Levin (who thought Bush v. Gore was decidedly wrong and wrongly decided) makes a convincing case that Bush would have won under every conceivable scenario even if the Supreme Court had sided with Vice-President Al Gore in Bush v Gore. See Men in Black: How the Supreme Court is Destroying America (2005) Regnery: Washington DC, pp. 170-173″1

1. A quote from With Christ in the Voting Booth (2013, David Shedlock – Calvary Press, p. 37, footnote)  For full disclosure, my book was endorsed by Mike Huckabee.

You May Also Like

Addressing Five Myths and Misconceptions About Evan McMullin

Adam Graham addresses five of the most common myths and misconceptions spread about Evan McMullin by the media, Donald Trump and his supporters.

Five Items of Interest: Iowa Caucus Edition

I’m back from my short-term blogging hiatus.  It’s good to see that…

Watch and Recap: IPTV 2018 Iowa 3rd Congressional District Debate

Shane Vander Hart live blogged the second debate of the Iowa 3rd Congressional District race between Congressman David Young (R-Iowa) and Cindy Axne.

Two Things Trump Did Right, One He Didn’t

Shane Vander Hart: Donald Trump gave one of his best speeches in Charlotte, NC, released good first ad for the general election, but his apology was lacking.