This is. Nothing burger. Nice try though
If there’s a ‘massive crush of the administrative state’ why are there so many illegals swarming the US?
This issue can be played both ways.
He backed the law in his ruling, but criticized it in his writing.
Non-issue in the big picture.
Dems don’t have the guts to filibuster him and he’ll get 60 plus votes.
Generally, this is the way the courts are supposed to work. Defer to elected officials & the people they put in place. It’s pretty convoluted, reminding us that “hard cases make bad law”.
At that level, it’s not unusual to see “strange bedfellows” cases. That the defendant was an illegal immigrant doesn’t mean the case favored illegal immigration; actual abuse of law cannot stand, and due process applies even for eviction. We’d have to know the point of the actual case, not hyperventilate over the defendant’s status.
The next candidate is going to be so far left by the time it's done because that's going to the establishment demand.
And by establishment I mean republican and democrat
The Reps have a history of nominating "conservative" justices only to see them become liberals. The Dems never miss with their nominations. The always remain liberal and vote as planned.
I have an uneasy feeling about Gorsuch. He could become another O'Connor or Kennedy or Souter.
If Gosuch had said "up" (or "down"), the Demonicrats would complain he should have said "down" (or "up").
What is more concerning is Gorsuch’s blank slate on abortion. From some of his answers to the Democrat abortion senators, he hints that somewhere this “strict constructionist” has found in the Constitution the right to kill your baby till the day of its birth. He emphasized that the right to abortion is “super precedence.”
Conservatives are haunted by the history of Republican presidents who gave us liberal activist SOTUS justices such as Warren, Souter, Kennedy, and Roberts. Not a good record at all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0FiMW4oVW8
Just a reminder of Scalia
He was personally a conservative..but he was an originalist.
Some outcomes were not conservative
This is another dog and pony show that will end in a confirmation. The Democrats have nothing but media assistance in chewing the scenery to keep the base upset and angry.
He was right to defer to the Supreme Court. He was also right to note the need for the Supreme Court to re-examine the Chevron ruling, which he believed forced his deference. He did not interpret the federal law, but deferred to the executive branch, and complained that he had to.
I just don’t like that he’s starting to come off insincere. For now, it’s towards the Democrats. But if it weren’t for Prof. Robert George’s defense of him, I’d be very wary of a Judge Souter. And I’m wary of relying on another, no matter how great that other is.
I do not suggest that I understand what the Judge had to say on the oxymoron of same-sex marriage. I did not hear the comment, or know how he justified it, if he went that far. Hopefully, if a relevant case comes before the Court, he will listen to the arguments, and change his opinion--if it has been correctly reported.
I suspect we’re going to be calling this guy “Gor-suck” before too long. He’s a Souter/Kennedy clone.
If Laura Ingraham knows of more conservative contenders then why are we even wasting our time on this guy Gorsuch? Now is the time to double-down. We are talking about positioning a Justice of the US Supreme Court. This guy stinks.