Washington (CNN)Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson says it's time to re-evaluate the Supreme Court's role -- all the way back to the court's first big decision in 1803.
Ben Carson questions whether presidents must obey Supreme Court
1 of 13
2 of 13
3 of 13
4 of 13
5 of 13
6 of 13
7 of 13
8 of 13
9 of 13
10 of 13
11 of 13
12 of 13
13 of 13
His comments came in response to questions on "Fox News Sunday" about whether a president must observe the Supreme Court's decisions.
"It is an open question. It needs to be discussed," Carson said.
Host Chris Wallace told Carson that the high court's authority to review laws' constitutionality has been in place since the 1803 decision in the case Marbury v. Madison.
"And I have said this is an area that we need to discuss, we need to get into a discussion of this because it has changed from the original intent," Carson said.
Asked if presidents must enforce Supreme Court decisions, Carson cited the Dred Scott decision, in which the high court rejected an enslaved African-American man's bid for freedom and set off public outrage that precipitated the Civil War.
"Well, Dred Scott, a perfect example. You know, the Supreme Court came up with this and Abraham Lincoln did not agree with it," Carson said. "Now, admittedly, it caused a lot of conflict, and eventually led to a Civil War, but we're in a better place for it."
When Wallace pressed Carson again, Carson said: "The way our Constitution is set up, the president or the executive branch is obligated to carry out the laws of the land. The laws of the land, according to our Constitution, are provided by the legislative branch. The laws of the land are not provided by the judiciary."