WATCH: Ben Carson Gets the Constitution Wrong Again

Interviewed on Fox News Sunday, Carson said it's 'an open question' as to whether the president can ignore Supreme Court rulings.

Trudy Ring

Trudy Ring is The Advocate’s senior politics editor and copy chief. She has been a reporter and editor for daily newspapers and LGBTQ+ weeklies/monthlies, trade magazines, and reference books. She is a political junkie who thinks even the wonkiest details are fascinating, and she always loves to see political candidates who are groundbreaking in some way. She enjoys writing about other topics as well, including religion (she’s interested in what people believe and why), literature, theater, and film. Trudy is a proud “old movie weirdo” and loves the Hollywood films of the 1930s and ’40s above all others. Other interests include classic rock music (Bruce Springsteen rules!) and history. Oh, and she was a Jeopardy! contestant back in 1998 and won two games. Not up there with Amy Schneider, but Trudy still takes pride in this achievement.

Read Full Bio

Trudy Ring

May 11 2015 3:46 PM EST

November 17 2015 5:28 AM EST

trudestress

Sorry to interrupt...
But we wanted to take a moment to thank you for reading. Your support makes original LGBTQ+ reporting possible. Help us hold Trump accountable.

One-time Monthly

$19.67 $50 Other

$5 $19.67 $50

Republican presidential hopeful Ben Carson has shown once again that while he may have been a brilliant surgeon, he's no constitutional scholar.

Interviewed by Chris Wallace this weekend on Fox News Sunday, Carson said it's "an open question" whether the president has to go along with a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court. Carson has said on several occasions that the president can and should ignore a Supreme Court ruling favoring marriage equality.

Carson tried to say that he said a president can disagree with Supreme Court rulings, and he brought up Abraham Lincoln's reaction to the 1857 Dred Scott decision, in which the court held that African-Americans, enslaved or free, were not citizens, as "a perfect example."

But Wallace pressed him, pointing out that he'd said the president can ignore Supreme Court decisions, even though, since the Marbury v. Madison ruling of 1803, "we have lived under the principle of judicial review, which says if the Supreme Court says this is the law, this is constitutional, the rest -- the executive has to observe that."

"This is an area we need to discuss," Carson responded. "We need to get into a discussion of this because it has changed from the original intent. ... It is an open question."