Speaker 1: Republican Senator Mike Braun yesterday said he would be OK putting the issue of interracial
marriage back to the states rather than the Supreme Court decision, which bans bans on
interracial marriage holding.
He would be fined, canceling that and letting states decide Do you want interracial marriage
to be legal or do you want interracial marriage to be illegal?
This understandably created a firestorm because it's a crazy thing to say.
Let's look at the clip.
Here is Mike Braun Speaker 4: So you would be OK with the Supreme
Court leaving the question of interracial marriage to the states.
Speaker 2: Yes, I think that that's something that if you're not wanting the Supreme Court
to weigh in on issues like that, you're not going to be able to have your cake and eat
it too.
I think that's hypocritical.
Speaker 4: About Griswold versus Connecticut.
You can list a whole host of issues, so Speaker 1: he very clearly heard the question,
and the point here is many Republicans like Mike Braun like to say the Supreme Court really
shouldn't decide about all sorts of things.
The Supreme Court shouldn't decide that abortion, generally speaking, should be legal.
It should just be up to the states.
The Supreme Court shouldn't decide that states aren't allowed to ban same sex marriage, and
so it's a reasonable question, which is would you also apply to this to interracial marriage?
Should states be allowed to ban interracial marriage?
He clearly heard the question and answered it.
Unfortunately for him, this was a completely outrageous thing to say, and he had to later
walk it back, claiming he didn't hear the question.
Braun walks back remark, criticizing the Supreme Court ruling that legalized interracial marriage,
and you've got to go to the bottom of the article on The Hill.
In a statement to The Hill later Tuesday, Braun said he misunderstood the question as
posed.
Earlier, during a virtual press conference, I misunderstood a line of questioning that
ended up being about interracial marriage.
Let me be clear on that issue there is no question the Constitution prohibits discrimination
of any kind based on race.
That is not something that is even up for debate.
I condemn racism in any form, at all levels and by any state's entities or individuals.
So claiming guilt, claiming he just didn't even really know what what he was being asked
now.
There is a very important legal conversation to have about when should states be left to
decide about whatever?
And not all of these issues are created equal when you say, well, leave states to decide
about abortion.
Well, OK.
The Supreme Court put in place this undue burden test.
That's the basis of Casey Casey is the court.
The decision, in addition to Roe v. Wade.
You've got Casey.
And there the court put in place this undue burden standard, which says that abortion
restrictions are unconstitutional if the purpose or effect places a substantial obstacle in
the path of women who want to get an abortion.
So that that's one decision and one sort of framework leaves states to decide about.
Do you have to have car insurance?
Most states say you do.
Virginia and New Hampshire have different rules, like in New Hampshire.
Car insurance isn't mandatory, but if you're driving causes damages, then you're liable.
And that's a decision that a state has made.
Leave states to decide about should marijuana be legal and can be purchased just like cigarets
or alcohol.
Well, for now, states can decide about that.
If the federal government were to in some way fully legalize marijuana.
Reschedule it.
OK, then you would sort of have a fight when it comes to the decision about interracial
marriage.
The Supreme Court said No, no, no, no, no.
There's a constitutional basis here, equal the equal protection clause.
If properly scrutinized as the Supreme Court did, doesn't allow states to ban interracial
marriage, you can't leave it to the states because of the federal supremacy clause and
the fact that banning interracial marriage would violate the federal constitution.
So the framework is very different than some of these other decisions.
So the point here is even if there is a legitimate debate to be had about what should states
have to decide about interracial marriage is outside of that, and I don't believe Mike
Braun misheard it nor misunderstood it.
I think he just gave the wrong answer.
It was just wrong and it was crazy.
And he got called out for it and he had to walk it back