Palin’s Painful SCOTUS Answer
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in 2008 Election, Palin, Supreme Court
No video yet, but here’s the transcript…
COURIC: Why, in your view, is Roe v. Wade a bad decision?PALIN: I think it should be a states issue not a federal government-mandated, mandating yes or no on such an important issue. I’m, in that sense, a federalist, where I believe that states should have more say in the laws of their lands and individual areas. Now, foundationally, also, though, it’s no secret that I’m pro-life that I believe in a culture of life is very important for this country. Personally that’s what I would like to see, um, further embraced by America.
COURIC: Do you think there’s an inherent right to privacy in the Constitution?
PALIN: I do. Yeah, I do.
COURIC: The cornerstone of Roe v. Wade.
PALIN: I do. And I believe that individual states can best handle what the people within the different constituencies in the 50 states would like to see their will ushered in an issue like that.
COURIC: What other Supreme Court decisions do you disagree with?
PALIN: Well, let’s see. There’s –of course –in the great history of America rulings there have been rulings, that’s never going to be absolute consensus by every American. And there are–those issues, again, like Roe v Wade where I believe are best held on a state level and addressed there. So you know–going through the history of America, there would be others but–
COURIC: Can you think of any?
PALIN: Well, I could think of–of any again, that could be best dealt with on a more local level. Maybe I would take issue with. But you know, as mayor, and then as governor and even as a Vice President, if I’m so privileged to serve, wouldn’t be in a position of changing those things but in supporting the law of the land as it reads today.
Listen, I honestly don’t think Palin is a dumb person, but I think at this point we have to seriously question her ability to handle pressure. Because it’s a safe bet that she does know some other SCOTUS decisions besides Roe v. Wade, but blanking in a relatively low pressure situation like an interview with Katie Couric and not being able to easily think on your feet are not very reassuring VP qualities.
However, if I hear the claim of “gotcha” journalism from Palin or if she questions Couric’s ethics again because of this, my opinion about her intelligence will drastically change.
I’ll have the video when it becomes available.
This entry was posted on Wednesday, October 1st, 2008 and is filed under 2008 Election, Palin, Supreme Court. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
October 1st, 2008 at 6:28 pm
Both of these questions are gotcha questions. That doesn’t make them out of bounds. I don’t think the media should utterly eschew such questions, because we as voters want to GET what the candidates’ positions are… .
The RvW one isn’t really controversial because her position is already well-established. And most folks are fairly familiar with it.
But the follow-up is really an attempt to put her on the spot as to how well-versed in general she is with SCOTUS jurisprudence.
I’ll go ahead and agree that Palin fumbled this question. That she couldn’t really speak to it knowledgeably reflects poorly on both her knowledge base and her poise. That doesn’t mean that it wasn’t a gotcha question.
But she was either wise or lucky not to cite a specific case as one she opposed. The overwhelming majority of Americans is unfamiliar with the handful of other rulings viewed as controversial by one side or the other. Were she to have come out against Kelo, for example, that could easily be spun against her, because most folks know little in the way of details.
Again, gotcha questions are not necessarily bad. I think the questions the media asks the candidates should be judged as a set, and each candidate’s set compared to the others. I’d like to know what Barack Obama thinks about Kelo, for example. I’d dearly love to know whether he thinks its OK for the government to force property owners to sell to other private enterprises.
Let’s consider how Couric slipped in the notion of privacy. The vast majority of Americans (including myself) believe this is a right we deserve. Even though there isn’t current either a good definition of it or a working legal definition. The word does not, to my knowledge, appear in the constitution, at least not in the context of granting this as a right. Any fair reading of the constitution and the RvW ruling leads reasonable folks to conclude that there was no legal reason to think this was a constitutional right until RvW essentially declared it.
This leaves pro-privacy folks with something of a conundrum. At this current point in history, Americans sorely lack the sorts of specific privacy rights we need to protect ourselves from a host of 21st-century invasions.Yet we can’t pass an amendment, because apparently this right is already constitutionally protected. Which would be great, if only we knew what it was and what we were therefore guaranteed.
October 1st, 2008 at 6:38 pm
Also, she calls herself a federalist then says she thinks that states should have more power. Now, I could be wrong on this, but weren’t the federalists the ones for more centralized power, and the anti-federalists against a strong federal court system, etc.?
October 1st, 2008 at 7:27 pm
Yes Andrew. Yes they were.
October 1st, 2008 at 8:01 pm
kritter,
Whaaaa?? Read this link, and then get back to us on whether it was wise or lucky that she not oppose another Supreme Court ruling: http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2008/08/veep-nominee-pa.html
This wasn’t a gotcha question, it was a GIVEAWAY and she completely blew it.
October 1st, 2008 at 8:19 pm
I do. I don’t remember much of what Dan Quale said in his time, but it couldn’t possibly be worse than this.
October 1st, 2008 at 9:02 pm
Sarah Palin flunks 8th grade civics! The federalists favored a strong centralized government! They opposed the Bill of Rights, states rights, and especially democray. What they feared most was giving voice and possibly power over to an uneducated, witless emotionally juvenile person such as Palin.
I fear that the Fereralists were correct.
October 1st, 2008 at 9:22 pm
ADDENDUM:
Watch this clip from CNN and tell me again she is not dumb.
October 1st, 2008 at 9:32 pm
Listen, I’ve seen smart people in meetings start to fall back on BS many times before. The only problem with this situation is she’s running to be second in command of the most powerful country on the planet.
No doubt she’s clearly out of depth, but like Dubya I don’t think she’s dumb.
October 1st, 2008 at 10:16 pm
Come on people, federalism means today what Palin said (or tried to say). Just like liberalism today means socialism more than libertarianism, whereby ardent capitalists and libertarians in the 18th and 19th centuries like Adam Smith and John Locke were called liberals.
Well, maybe Palin is book smart, but she lacks knowledge – much like Barack Obama does – but unlike Barack, when she speaks and says nothing it sounds like nothing. Or it makes you feel like your chewing on aluminum foil when you listen.
October 1st, 2008 at 10:39 pm
Um, no. Federalism in the context of the United States is very much about a strong central government-this is a basic fact any VP should know. I’m not going to entertain any re-defining just to let her slide on this.
October 1st, 2008 at 10:45 pm
Re: Federalists.
While historically y’all may have a point, I think it’s perfectly reasonable to call “support for a federal system (i.e. separate states rights)” federalism. That’s really a “gotcha” point. Can’t you just enjoy the fact that she can’t answer any questions without overstating the argument?
October 2nd, 2008 at 10:08 am
Is Sarah Palin dumb? Of course not. Is she unqualified? You better believe it. One question is legitimate in this context, the other is not.
I can’t imagine a worse pick for VP than Sarah Palin, but I won’t stoop to calling the lady dumb. Not now, not ever.
October 2nd, 2008 at 12:19 pm
I can’t believe that she used the word Federalist properly.
http://www.entertonement.com/clips/31715/Katie-Couric/Sarah-Palin/CBS-Evening-News/What-Other-Supreme-Court-Decisions-Do-You-Disagree-With