« Previous | Main | Next »

Palin Silent on Supreme Court Question

Share

October 01, 2008 7:53 PM

ABC News' Ariane de Vogue Reports: In an interview with CBS's Katie Couric on "The Evening News" Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin could not cite a Supreme Court decision she thinks was wrongly decided besides Roe v. Wade.

In the interview, Palin refereed vaguely to the "great history of America" but neglects to mention some of the most historic decisions that have troubled many Americans.

A few example might be:

--Dred Scott v. Sanford 1857 which held that blacks--slaves or free--could not be or become U.S. citizens
--Plessy v. Ferguson 1896 the court upheld racial segregation under the doctrine separate but equal
--Korematsu v. United States 1944 upheld the internment orders for Americans of Japanese descent during World War II

The vice presidential candidate seemed to have forgotten that three months ago she criticized the courts ruling in Exxon Shipping v. Baker which gutted a damages award after the 1989 oil spill. At the time she released a statement saying,

"While the decision brings some degree of closure to Alaskans suffering from 19 years of litigation and delay, the Court gutted the jurys decision on punitive damages."

Palin also failed to mention some cases recently decided which have troubled her running mate, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. For instance last term, the court overturned a Louisiana law allowing the death penalty for someone who rapes but does not kill a child. McCain said the decision was "an assault on law enforcement efforts to punish these heinous felons."

And McCain called last term's Boumediene decision which found that detainees held in Guantanamo Bay had a constitutional right to challenge their detention in U.S. courts, "One of the worst decisions in the history of this country."

Palin did say she thinks there is an inherent right to privacy in the constitution, a notion that Chief Justice John Roberts shared in his confirmation hearing without commenting directly on Roe.

Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., who appeared on the Wednesday program in a separate interview, when asked which case he thought was wrongly decided, referred to but did not name United States v. Morrison in which the court overturned portions of the Violence Against Women Act, legislation that Biden had spearheaded.

October 1, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (346)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Dumb and bumber

Posted by: Will | Oct 1, 2008 8:10:55 PM

Shouldnt the headline read "Palin Silent on EVERY question?"

Posted by: sue | Oct 1, 2008 8:14:38 PM

The woman has zero interest and knowledge about America, it's history or foreign policy.
Unfortunately many of her supporters don't care about any of them either.

Posted by: Truth Matters | Oct 1, 2008 8:16:36 PM

More gotcha journalism:

now, ms couric, are you trying to raise your dismal ratings to support your collosal failure going from Today to the evening news? How about this? Why don't you ask Obama what newspapers he reads? Are you afraid of being called racist if you did ask him that? Why target Palin? what kind of stupid quesiton is that?

Ms couric you will always be fluff, and your biased treatment of the mccain campaign will not support your meager credentials as a fluff journalist.

Posted by: liberati | Oct 1, 2008 8:19:45 PM

Quick name me 3 superme court cases...........from 1972.......go

Posted by: jmdady | Oct 1, 2008 8:22:20 PM

This is embarrassing for America.

She seems like a nice lady but Sarah Palin is simply out of her league.

Can you really imagine her as THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES?!

Posted by: Kirk | Oct 1, 2008 8:23:39 PM

Is McCain going to show up at the debate to support his soul mate?

Posted by: doug | Oct 1, 2008 8:27:56 PM

It's just so offensive that until she accepted the VP nod, she didn't really show interest (outside of Alaska) in anything having to do with our country...our history, our troubles with the economy, our allies, our laws.

She comes across as a self-obsorbed woman who thinks she can get by on her being a woman and attacking Obama...oh, and "zingers". As if having the best "zinger" is going to validate her readiness for the job.

She knows she's not ready, but very selfishly and for her own political gain, she's determined.

This is so offensive.

Posted by: tanya | Oct 1, 2008 8:28:23 PM

She should just quit. She just does not have what it takes to be even the VP, forget about the presidency.

I feel sorry for her.

Posted by: Eric Totter | Oct 1, 2008 8:29:47 PM

i dont care what she knows or doesnt know; i care that she is from middle america and has our values at heart. she is not dogmatic; she is practical. and i care about the issues that confront this country not about passing a journalist's pop quiz.

from a social studies teacher in louisiana

Posted by: ron | Oct 1, 2008 8:30:51 PM

all journalism should be gotcha journalism. Palin is obviously an idiot.

Posted by: Eric | Oct 1, 2008 8:30:54 PM

Gee..If these questions were directed at Obama, I wonder what his answers might be?

Huh, huh, huh, oh, oh, oh..

That's CORRECT Sen. Obama!

Posted by: Voter In America | Oct 1, 2008 8:31:32 PM

Isn't that kind of like voting "present"? At least she didn't say it was above her pay grade.......OY!

Posted by: SadStateOfAffairs | Oct 1, 2008 8:32:12 PM

ps. the journalists have their research teams look up the questions and they hold the answer document. i have known several of them and they are not the brightest bulbs in the pack: they are news readers, period.

Posted by: ron | Oct 1, 2008 8:32:35 PM

Sarah you are only a lipstick tube of a candidate, Ms Couric could have asked you many tougher questions but instead allowed you to come up with a case, ANY case, but you flumberedstumbled. Gotcha is only gothca if you dont have an answer...any answer. Thank you to Moravian College an Prof. J Reynolds for making me write so many reviews of courts cases during summer Constitutional law class! I know more than a V.P. candidate. Take away her lipstick and she's got nothing.

Posted by: scott Garner | Oct 1, 2008 8:34:16 PM

It does not surprise me that Palin has no knowledge about Supreme Court rulings. She has never been on national stage until now.

I confess I do not know all the Supreme Court rulings, either. But I am not running for the VP!!

The idea for her being a VP is like a successful local grocery store owner tries run an international company.

Posted by: CT | Oct 1, 2008 8:35:36 PM

This was a political choice - and not much thought was put into the decision to pick Sarah Palin. She is an airhead, and he might as well have picked Paris Hilton.
The sad part of this picture is that she is not bright enough to see that she is a "fool" - and how silly she looks - If I ever thought I was out of my comfort zone as she is, I would back out -


Posted by: patricia burkhart | Oct 1, 2008 8:36:52 PM

Yeah defintely no Hillary clinton. This is just sad. I disagree with the supreme court's decision in 2000 to make George W Bush president.

Posted by: rachel | Oct 1, 2008 8:37:05 PM

and biden saw fdr on t.v

Posted by: colorado | Oct 1, 2008 8:38:44 PM

"Palin Silent on Supreme Court Question"? If only she had been...

Posted by: rst | Oct 1, 2008 8:38:55 PM

Post a comment