Showing posts with label Justice Gorsuch. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Justice Gorsuch. Show all posts

Friday, April 07, 2017

Snagged Comment


It’s almost impossible to overstate how important this (Gorsuch)  was.  Had this seat gone to the radical left, the country would have been irreparably damaged and a whole swath of your rights would have been gutted.
Pop the champagne, folks.  This one was “All the marbles.”


Thursday, April 06, 2017

Critical Mass

Res Ipsa Loquitur        


Judge Gorsuch is, therefore, slated for the final vote on his confirmation no later than seven o’clock Friday evening. All 52 Republicans and three Democrats are expected to vote for his confirmation, allowing him to replace Antonin Scalia as Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.
If President Trump never does another thing, his presidency will be viewed as successful, even nation saving.  Except by the people he saved us from. Thank God.

Friday, February 03, 2017

... the fight Democrats want


by William A. Jacobson   

This is the fight Democrats want, but I’m not sure it’s really the fight they need

Wednesday, February 01, 2017

Scalia Hearts Gorsuch










The only downside to Neil Gorsuch's SCOTUS
nomination is he can't become Chief Justice.  Yet.

SNIPS from "Chris Matthews: Dems who vote for Gorsuch “will have to answer” for it for 30 years."

On MSNBC this evening, Chris Matthews cautioned Democratic Senators that if they vote to confirm Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, they will have to answer for it for the rest of their political career.

His reasoning was a supremely political one: that at age 49, Gorsuch is likely to be on the Court for 30 years. And that any Dem voting to confirm him would have to answer, over all those years, for his decisions on controversial issues such as abortion and gun rights: “it will be on you,” warned Matthews.

Note: Earlier, Matthews predicted that the Gorsuch nomination will fail because Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will not invoke the “nuclear option.” And since, according to Matthews, no Dems will vote to confirm, the nomination will fall short of the required 60 votes.

This Insurrectionist disagrees. No matter how much McConnell reveres Senate tradition, he will not let such a qualified jurist, and Trump’s first Court nominee, go down to ignominious defeat. If push comes to shove, I predict that McConnell will invoke the nuclear option, and Gorsuch will be confirmed on a simple-majority vote.


For a lawyer's view on Gorsuch, read this SCOTUSblog profile on Gorsuch. Some of his key legal positions are below

* Second Amendment: He wrote in United States v. Games-Perez these rights "may not be infringed lightly."

* Roe v. Wade: Gorsuch has never had the opportunity to write on Roe v. Wade. But, for any indication on how he would vote on abortions, the "right to privacy" defense from the dormant commerce clause is relevant, and he isn't buying it. This clause, known as "dormant" since it is not explicitly written out in the Constitution, indicates that since Congress regulates interstate commerce, states cannot pass legislation that unduly burdens or discriminates against other states and interstate commerce.

* Hobby Lobby v. Sebelius: He distrusts efforts to remove religious expression from public spaces generally, but watch out for cases citing RFRA and RLUIPA — he ruled in Hobby Lobby v. Sebelius that the contraception mandate in Obamacare placed an undue burden on the company's religious exercise and violated RFRA.

* Capital punishment: Gorsuch is not friendly to requests for relief from death sentences through federal habeas corpus.

* Criminal law: Gorsuch believes there is an overwhelming amount of legislation about criminal law, and believes that cases can be interpreted in favor of defendants even if it hurts the government. On mens rea — which means "guilty mind," or essentially the intent to commit a crime — Gorsuch is willing to read narrowly even if it means it doesn't favor the prosecution.

* Checks and balances: Gorsuch does not like deferring to federal agencies when they interpret laws, so watch out for use of the Chevron rule, which allows federal agents to enforce laws in any way that is not expressly prohibited. Gorsuch may push back.