Another Republican Ignorant on Constitutional Law

I hate to bash Jon Runyan. He was a good player for the Eagles. However, if he wants to run for Congress he should have some familiarity with the Supreme Court.

At a debate Tuesday night, Runyan's Democratic opponent, Rep. John Adler asked, "Jon, it's a different branch of government, but can you give me an example from the last 10 or 15 years of a Supreme Court decision in which you strongly disagree?"

"That I strongly disagree with?" Runyan clarified, pausing before considering his final answer.

"Dred Scott," Runyan responded, drawing laughter from the audience.

Dred Scott was a slave who attempted to gain his freedom. He lost his case in the infamous Supreme Court decision Dred Scott v. Sandford on March 6, 1857. Needless to say, that Supreme Court decision was more than 15 years ago.

Runyan probably said Dred Scott because Republicans have used that has a code word to social conservatives against abortion. Here are some examples.

"Like Dred Scott, Roe has the potential to be overturned, given the right circumstances and the right make-up of the Supreme Court. Political rhetoric notwithstanding, we subscribe to that view. In his heart, we believe Senator Ashcroft thinks so, too."

Republican National Coalition for Life

"Roe v. Wade is not going to be the last word on American abortion law any more than Dred Scott v. Sanford was the last word on the rights of blacks."

Conservative columnist Jeff Jacoby

"I think, as many do, that Roe v. Wade was as big a travesty as the Supreme Court decision on Dred Scott, which in 1857 declared that descendants of slaves could not become U.S. citizens."

Peggy Noonan

I doubt Runyan even knows what the Dred Scott ruling was about. What we are seeing is more and more conservatives that think in talking points. These people do not have the intellectual curiosity to get into the policy weeds. Therefore no one should be suprised Runyan or Christine O'Donnell have no idea about constitutional law.