“Gorsuch really screwed us on immigration.Most of the commentary has been bad on this and here is why”
Gorsuch didn’t screw anyone. He stood up for sound constitutional principles, but most people have attacked him without reading him.
Here is where you can find Gorsuchs 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 crowns abuse of pretended crimes like this as one of their reasons for revolution. See Declaration of
Independence ¶21. Todays vague laws may not be as
invidious, but they can invite the exercise of arbitrary
power all the sameby 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 aliens 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.
I agree with Gorush on this.
He is absolutely, righteously, correct.
>> most people have attacked him without reading him <<
Yep, we believe that if you read more than the headlines, it is bad for your health.