Look, I think by the time my case was over and other ones, everybody on both sides of the aisle in Congress said we can't run a government by this kind of process and they repealed the law and that's good.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
One of the things the government can't do is run anything. The only things our government runs are the post office and the railroads, and both of them are bankrupt.
If the law is upheld only by government officials, then all law is at an end.
You let Congress make the laws. You work with the Congress as the president to make sure that those laws are accurate and to the best of our ability, but you don't turn it over to the federal judges to make those laws.
If a radical devolution of powers was possible, it would have been done before. The assumption of states' rights is gone. There's no support for it in the Supreme Court and there's no support for it in public opinion.
I know no method to secure the repeal of bad or obnoxious laws so effective as their stringent execution.
I have introduced a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United and make it clear that the Congress and state legislatures do have the ability and the power to regulate and get corporate funding out of political campaigns.
It is no longer appropriate for me as an American to sit by and expect my government to get it done.
All I want to do is get back to a principle-based Congress.
They rushed to move it forward, uh, and then a lawsuit was filed and we spent many months litigating, rather than trying to come up with legislation and move forward on that front.
The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly.