Posted on 11/25/2017 8:26:54 AM PST by Olog-hai
More than 2,000 conservatives in tuxedos and gowns recently filled Union Station’s main hall for a steak dinner and the chance to cheer the man who saved the Supreme Court from liberal control. Justice Neil Gorsuch didn’t disappoint them, just as he hasn’t in his first seven months on the Supreme Court.
“Tonight I can report that a person can be both a publicly committed originalist and textualist and be confirmed to the Supreme Court,” Gorsuch said to sustained applause from members of the Federalist Society, using terms by which conservatives often seek to distinguish themselves from more liberal judges.
The 50-year-old justice has been almost exactly what conservatives hoped for and liberals dreaded when he joined the court in April. He has consistently, even aggressively, lined up with the court’s most conservative justices. He has even split with Chief Justice John Roberts, viewed by some as insufficiently conservative because of his two opinions upholding President Barack Obama’s health law. […]
Liberals’ despair about Gorsuch goes beyond his judicial actions. He occupies a seat once held by Justice Antonin Scalia which they thought Obama would get to fill. But Senate Republicans refused to consider Obama’s nominee, a strategy that paid off when Donald Trump unexpectedly won the White House. …
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
Why attack Levin? Picking on Sessions is getting boring.
For what? Obama could have played the old “recess appointment” trick if he really wanted Garland in there. He was counting on Hillary winning and doing just that, most likely. Mitch did very little except posture.I’ll say it. Thank You Mitch McConnell. - fungoking
He could have acted on the same assumption that Hillary would win - and have confirmed Garland as a lesser evil than whoever Hillary would nominate and, with Hillary’s hoped-for Senate majority, get confirmed. So yes, McConnell does deserve credit for Justice Gorsuch.
If McConnell were of such a mind, then he would not be acting as he has been acting with respect to the Alabama special Senate election. He would also be one of the quickest to shut up McCain and other such RINOs with respect to Obamacare and Dreamers.
Rather than disdain something you don’t understand, perhaps a wiser approach is find out what the Founders meant by the “Laws of Nature and Nature’s God.”
Remember that Gorsuch replaced Scalia - fairly even trade. The next picks will (hopefully) turn the balance
Remember that Gorsuch replaced Scalia - fairly even trade. The next picks will (hopefully) turn the balance
>>Rather than disdain something you don’t understand, perhaps a wiser approach is find out what the Founders meant by the “Laws of Nature and Nature’s God.”<<
I understand it just fine — as I explained. But I see no reference to “natural law” in the USC, It is a made-up term with no inherent meaning when applied to the laws of man and God.
Totally agree!
“For what? Obama could have played the old “recess appointment” trick if he really wanted Garland in there.”
Actually that’s not true. But why let an inconvenient fact cloud your thinking.
L
Yes, it’s true, I’m afraid. Obama could have done exactly that.
I always suspect Uniparty machinations. And everyone else ought to as well. Now if McConnell were consistent along the same lines as the rejection of Garland and the confirmation of Gorsuch, I would be more confident in him.
A Recess Appointment can only be done when the Senate is in an actual Recess. McConnel never let that happen credit where it’s due.
L
The tradeoff there is that the government never “shut down” (remember that talk?) and he kept funding Zerocare and other liberal programs, pushing national debt to $19½ trillion. While shutting out Garland, he was giving so much more to Obama of what else he wanted, never mind the fingers crossed behind the back with respect to Hillary.
Quite a dance the Uniparty did in 2016, never mind no less than 17 presidential candidates being thrown at us—but at least we now have the most conservative POTUS since Reagan out of that.
What you say is true. But then again, so is what I said.
No fan of Mitch, but even if he did it accidentally he gets credit for keeping Garland off SCOTUS.
L
Well, I think that we agree on that score.
I don’t think the Senate has been out of sessions since Harry Reid was senate majority leader and scotus already ruled that recess appointments under pro-forma sessions where violations.
This is now done for the precise reason to block recess appointments.
Imho I believe to be in pro-forma sessions is an abuse of power and when the Senate goes into pro-forma sessions they should require a vote with a quorum everyday re-affirming the idea of a pro-forma session.
Perhaps Pence should throw them a curveball next time there is a motion of unanimous consent to enter pro-forma session?
Do they need to block recess appointments under Trump? That question is now begged.
The governmental activities during this insistence on non-shutdown are incredibly heavy in terms of advancing left-wing goals and principles in and of themselves. It certainly has “evolved” into its own issue.
I just read recently (like today) that McConnell is upholding the tradition so Trump can’t make recess appointments.
It was within a story of “GOP’s real fear” regarding Roy Moore, that he’ll be a maverick and force votes by note agreeing to Unanimous consent. If 1 Senator disagrees with Unanimous consent then has to go through a complete floor vote.
Getting rid of Obamacare would make him WILDLY successful in my book~!
There is a huge difference between working to defeat Trump, and not liking him. He’s not a Conservative, he’s a populist businessman.
I have no idea what ax you’re trying to grind. The never-Trump movement was prominent and vocal. They called themselves conservatives but they were actively working to put Hillary in office. This isn’t my personal theory; it is an established fact.
When Cruz accepted a prime speaking slot from Trump but refused to endorse him, he joined the never-Trumpers. He claimed to be a conservative but he was doing his part to elect Hillary. This isn’t difficult. In a two-candidate race, if you’re undermining one, you’re helping the other.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.