Ping.
Looks to me like he took a shot at Congress, not at Justice Gorsuch. The NY Daily Spews is vomiting up FAKE NEWS.
I support Gorsuch in the broader principle that we can’t let legislatures get away with writing sloppy, crappy catch-all laws which are SO open to interpretation that virtually anyone could be found to be violating them.
It’s a shame this case had to deal with immigration, but it raised a serious issue with our laws generally.
“Today’s Court decision means that Congress must close loopholes that block the removal of dangerous criminal aliens, including aggravated felons,” Trump tweeted. “This is a public safety crisis that can only be fixed by Congress — House and Senate must quickly pass a legislative fix to ensure violent criminal aliens can be removed from our society. Keep America Safe!”
Can you point to where the President blasted Gorsuch vote on this? Trump is correctly pushing it back on Congress. Headline is a lie and fake news.
Decision is NOT a major loss and barely a technical one.
Besides, with my 10th grade education, I read him speaking to Congress and no gripe about SCOTUS can be found but, right whatever ewe want.....
Good “optics” by Trump.
I don't read it that way. President Trump's reported comment (tweet) correctly identified Congress as the only body which can fix the law. Nowhere in the "tweet" did President Trump name Justice Gorsuch or even criticize the Supreme Court's ruling.
If President Trump "blasted" Justice Gorsuch, it wasn't reported in this article.
Rewrite the law and GET IT RIGHT this time.
It’s not Gorsuch’s fault they wrote a bad law but the speed with which some so-called conservatives want to criticize his judicial acumen says a lot about them.
This decision didn’t have anything to do with deportation of “illegal” aliens did it? Didn’t it only pertain to deportation of foreigners here legally that committed a crime?
Yeah, sure. He “called him out” in a big way. I expect there’ll be duel on the White House lawn any day now...
Seriously, though, please point to the part of the story where president Trump “called out” justice Gorsuch.
No federal law, in fact, no law whatsoever, should contain "catch-all" provisions.
"Catch-all" provisions in laws are one of the major problems with our country today.
There is no defending Gorsuch on this. What a fargin disaster.
Look for more of this to happen as the years ago by.
Trump basically just tweeted Grocsuh decision. Trump is agreeing with Grosuch that CONGRESS needs to act on this because the law is far too vague as written.
How about the wonder morons around here stop whit the hysteric knee jerk emoting and start thinking for once?
POTUS Trump’s Tweet did not attack Gorsuch or the SCOTUS.
Again we se the Media types injecting their Opinion without any evidence of Fact.
Vague law is subject to bad interpretation. The fault lies with Congress, which is the entity called out by Trump. The writer of this article says the comments were a “veiled” reference to Gorsuch - but the specific content was aimed at Congress.
“Crime of violence” is not a legal term, and should not be used to identify a legally justiciable deportation condition.
Gorsuch, as is pointed out elsewhere on this thread, echoed Scalia in his judgment.
I would be curious as to whether Justice Thomas was consistent with his prior vote. I would expect that he was, given the stature of his legal mind.
Stupid congress-critters write stupid laws, and the public suffer because of it.
Until Congress fixes this Trump must deport all criminal aliens equally.
Gorsuch’s opinion would, if accepted by the full court, put an end to allowing bureaucrats from interpreting vague provisions of laws to fine and imprison people for doing stuff like draining puddles in their back yards. If his opinion became the majority, then the EPA and other stupid agencies would be prohibited from turning vague provisions into hammers to pound ordinary citizens.
You have to read between the lines. In this case Gorsuch found that the wording of the statute regarding what is or is not a “crime of violence” could be interpreted by some bureaucrat as making something like shoplifting into a violent crime, since there is a possibility that a store clerk might fall and injure himself while chasing you through the parking lot.
Likewise a provision that allows standing water anywhere on your property to be considered some kind of watershed would be voided on the same principle.
Gorsuch struck a blow against the deep state with his opinion. Hopefully this kind of reasoning will be applied to all federal statutes.
Remember that at least among the conservative justices, they are not stupid people.
Had Chief Justice Roberts voted against Obamacare, it would have not only passed, but the decision would have been written by the liberals, and it would be *impossible* to get rid of. Ever. “Written in stone.”
But by voting for Obamacare, Justice Roberts could give it a “poison pill” to insure that sooner rather than later, it would be destroyed. And that is what he did, which is why Obamacare is on the road to ruin RIGHT NOW.
Yet only a painfully few number of people grasped this idea, elsewhere and here, and roundly cursed Chief Justice for being a traitor. Many still likely hold that belief.
Now this being said, what about the Gorsuch vote?
Gorsuch was *specifically* hired to be an originalist.
This means to ignore political expediency and public opinion, and to rely on the constitutionality of laws. And that is it.
Notice that he did not join with the liberal opinion, but wrote his own, concurrent opinion.
The SCOTUS decision.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/15-1498_1b8e.pdf
“JUSTICE GORSUCH, agreeing that the Immigration and Nationality Act provision at hand is unconstitutionally vague for the reasons identified in Johnson v. United States, concluded that the void for vagueness doctrine, at least properly conceived, serves as a faithful expression of ancient due process and separation of powers principles the Framers recognized as vital to ordered liberty under the Constitution. The Government’s argument that a less-than-fair-notice standard should apply where (as here) a person faces only civil, not criminal, consequences from a statute’s operation is unavailing. In the criminal context, the law generally must afford “ordinary people...fair notice of the conduct it punishes,” and it is hard to see how the Due Process Clause might often require any less than that in the civil context. Nor is there any good reason to single out civil deportation for assessment under the fair notice standard because of the special gravity of its penalty when so many civil laws impose so many similarly severe sanctions. Alternative approaches that do not concede the propriety of the categorical ordinary case analysis are more properly addressed in another case, involving either the Immigration and Nationality Act or another statute, where the parties have a chance to be heard.”
Bottom line: Gorsuch didn’t vote with the liberals. He voted with the constitution. The job he was hired to do. Republicans and conservatives were unified that we did not want just an ideologue on the court, but an originalist. The logic was that while an originalist will not always vote with you, they will vote for what is constitutionally right. So in the long run you will win, and win better than you would have with an ideologue.
“Today’s Court decision means that Congress must close loopholes that block the removal of dangerous criminal aliens, including aggravated felons,” Trump tweeted. “This is a public safety crisis that can only be fixed by Congress — House and Senate must quickly pass a legislative fix to ensure violent criminal aliens can be removed from our society. Keep America Safe!”
...
The headline is corrupt and 100% wrong.