Jon Runyan, a former pro football player and now the Republican nominee against freshman Rep. John Adler (D-NJ), has added his voice to the recent constitutional jurisprudence of GOP candidates -- listing the 1857 Dred Scott v. Sanford
Supreme Court decision as a recent
case that he disagreed with.
As the Asbury Park Press
reports, from a debate last night:
"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?" Adler asked.
"That I strongly disagree with?" Runyan asked, pausing for a moment to consider the question. "Dred Scott."
There was some laughter in the audience.
Adler then asked the question again, pointing out that he asked for decisions in the previous 10-15 years. Runyan was reportedly unable to give an answer.
After the debate, Adler told PolitickerNJ that he would have referred to the Citizens United decision as his own answer to the question.
[TPM SLIDESHOW: New Kids On The Court: SCOTUS Confirmations Throughout History]
It should be noticed that Dred Scott -- which did much more than affirm the practice of slavery, but went further and ruled that African-Americans could not be citizens or equal human beings, and was later overturned via the 14th Amendment -- is often used by pro-life politicians as a dog-whistle message to their base, signaling opposition to Roe v. Wade.
Question: Was Runyan's answer better or worse than Christine O'Donnell's performance in the Delaware Senate race, when she was asked the same question at a debate -- she asked for a hint.