Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: VanDeKoik
>> your retard character assinaation somehow has “merit”? <<

No, if Gorsuch votes to overturn "landmark" liberal "precedents", like the "right" to an abortion and the legalization of gay "marriage", THEN the Gorsuch cheerleaders on this board have merit and were right to gloat about how "Trump kept his campaign promise" and how Gorsuch is the second coming of Scalia.

UNTIL that happens, the Gorsuch love fest has absolutely NO merit.

But go ahead, keep mindlessly cheerleading for this judge because Trump appointed him. We all know its impossible for a GOP president to appoint a bad SCOTUS judge, right?

29 posted on 04/17/2018 11:27:46 AM PDT by BillyBoy (States rights is NOT a suicide pact.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]


To: BillyBoy

You are an idiot. Grow up.


30 posted on 04/17/2018 11:30:59 AM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

To: BillyBoy

Those cases aren’t even before the court, you idiot.

Like what type of stupid standard is that? Screw everything else! As long as you don’t overturn what isn’t before you, then you are scum!

God just frigging idiots these days call themselves conservatives. Just loony toons.


47 posted on 04/17/2018 12:24:50 PM PDT by VanDeKoik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

To: BillyBoy

Judge Scalia would say you are an idiot.

That “Conservative” enough for you moron?

https://dornsife.usc.edu/assets/sites/678/docs/Antonin_Scalia_Philosophy_of_Legal_Interpretation.pdf


64 posted on 04/17/2018 2:36:52 PM PDT by MNJohnnie ("The political class is a bureaucracy designed to perpetuate itself" Rush Limbaugh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

To: BillyBoy
Don't be ridiculous.

There is NO judge who will vote the way YOU want, 100 percent of the time.

Because J. Gorsuch is a textualist and originalist, when he runs up against an ambiguous law, he is not going to uphold it just because YOU think it's a good law.

The whole idea of strict interpretation is that you do NOT consider whether a law is good, or bad, or well-intended. You ask only whether it passes constitutional muster.

Doing otherwise is legislating from the bench. Thought we agreed that was a BAD thing.

70 posted on 04/17/2018 5:00:15 PM PDT by AnAmericanMother (Ecce Crucem Domini, fugite partes adversae. Vicit Leo de Tribu Iuda, Radix David, Alleluia!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson