Yeah, I’m an “idiot”. The crowd blindly supporting a judge because he claims to be an “originalist” were soooo much smarter and wiser than me. Well, good luck having Gorsuch around for the next few decades. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
Here is where you can find Gorsuch’s concurring opinion
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/15-1498_1b8e.pdf
Here is what Gorsuch wrote:
“Vague laws invite arbitrary power. Before the Revolution,
the crime of treason in English law was so capaciously
construed that the mere expression of disfavored
opinions could invite transportation or death. The founders
cited the crown’s abuse of “pretended” crimes like this as one of their reasons for revolution. See Declaration of
Independence ¶21. Today’s vague laws may not be as
invidious, but they can invite the exercise of arbitrary
power all the same—by leaving the people in the dark
about what the law demands and allowing prosecutors and
courts to make it up.
The law before us today is such a law. Before holding a
lawful permanent resident alien like James Dimaya subject
to removal for having committed a crime, the Immigration
and Nationality Act requires a judge to determine
that the ordinary case of the alien’s crime of conviction
involves a substantial risk that physical force may be
used. But what does that mean? Just take the crime at
issue in this case, California burglary, which applies to
everyone from armed home intruders to door-to-door
salesmen peddling shady products. How, on that vast
spectrum, is anyone supposed to locate the ordinary case
and say whether it includes a substantial risk of physical force? The truth is, no one knows.”
Sounds pretty good to me, but I live in DC and the arbitrary and capricious decisionmakine and abuse of power here sickens me every day. I guess you are ok with it.
Either that or you are just going postal without a clue what was done to upset you.
“Yeah, I’m an “idiot”.
You called?