What's new
By:

SCotUS nominee Neil Gorsuch

Siro

Siro

Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
In more important news than HuffPo's story about how Trump will totes get impeached, we have a new Supreme Court nominee. He seems certain to get confirmed, as Republicans threatened to do away with the filibuster if the Dems tried it. We don't know much about the nominee, but from the BBC story about the guy:

Where does Judge Gorsuch stand on key issues?

Abortion: He has not spoken out about Roe v Wade, the case which legalised abortion nationwide in 1973, making it difficult to pin down where he stands on the issue.

Birth control: Judge Gorsuch has supported religious institutions which objected to requirements for employers to provide access to contraception. In one of his most high-profile cases, he voted in favour of the religious owners of retailer Hobby Lobby who refused to fund certain forms of birth control via staff health insurance.

Gun rights: He hasn't ruled directly on firearms restrictions, but is thought to be generally pro-second amendment. He once wrote in a legal opinion that a citizen's right to bear arms "must not be infringed lightly".

Euthanasia: He has been vocal about assisted dying, writing a book in 2009 which opposed legalisation.
Click to expand...

I'm sure there is a lot more to the man. I also question whether Trump will live to regret the day he nominated a principled limited-government judge, as Trump is not a conservative, and the I feel Gorsuch will likely vote against any potential expansion to the executive powers.

Thoughts?
 
He's more right than Scalia from what I've heard, and adamantly anti-abortion.
 
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/31/opinion/why-liberals-should-back-neil-gorsuch.html?_r=0

Why Liberals Should Back Neil Gorsuch
By NEAL K. KATYALJAN. 31, 2017


I am hard-pressed to think of one thing President Trump has done right in the last 11 days since his inauguration. Until Tuesday, when he nominated an extraordinary judge and man, Neil Gorsuch, to be a justice on the Supreme Court....
Click to expand...

I have no doubt that if confirmed, Judge Gorsuch would help to restore confidence in the rule of law. His years on the bench reveal a commitment to judicial independence — a record that should give the American people confidence that he will not compromise principle to favor the president who appointed him.
Click to expand...

In a pair of immigration cases, De Niz Robles v. Lynch and Gutierrez-Brizuela v. Lynch, Judge Gorsuch ruled against attempts by the government to retroactively interpret the law to disfavor immigrants. In a separate opinion in Gutierrez-Brizuela, he criticized the legal doctrine that federal courts must often defer to the executive branch’s interpretations of federal law, warning that such deference threatens the separation of powers designed by the framers.
Click to expand...

by: Neal K. Katyal, an acting solicitor general in the Obama administration, is a law professor at Georgetown and a partner at Hogan Lovells.
 
dalamon said:
He's more right than Scalia from what I've heard, and adamantly anti-abortion.
Click to expand...

Where did you hear that? From what I've read, he seems like a reasonable fella, and he hasn't spoken out for or against abortion.
 
dalamon said:
He's more right than Scalia from what I've heard, and adamantly anti-abortion.
Click to expand...

I've read, repeatedly, that he is a "Scalia clone".

Of note:

49, young for a SC Justice
Harvard Law
Clerked for Justice Kennedy at one point
10 years private law firm
Staunchly conservative used to describe him repeatedly
Critic of the Chevron deference: where judges defer to admin agencies when interpreting federal statutes.
Very against Dr. assisted suicide
Relied on "originalist" interpretation of the Constitution

In 2006 he was unanimously confirmed to his current seat. Yes votes included Schumer, Feinstein & Leahy
 
Siro said:
Where did you hear that? From what I've read, he seems like a reasonable fella, and he hasn't spoken out for or against abortion.
Click to expand...

trump-scotus-Artboard_1.png


visual didn't show up properly, but the arrow is Scalia. Only Clarence Thomas is above Gorsuch
 
One way to estimate how a potential Supreme Court nominee will rule once confirmed (past opinions often don’t offer very reliable hints), is something called the “judicial common space” score. This methodology places Gorsuch to the right of Scalia with only Clarence Thomas on the current court scoring as more conservative.

https://https://epstein.wustl.edu/research/JCS.html
 
I don't know, I would have really liked Merrick garland, but I'm not all that opposed to this guy.
 
If you're an originalist, you'll like him. If you're not, you won't. Seems like everybody has respect for him, even if they disagree with his rulings. Interesting choice for Trump, as Gorsuch is not in favor of the executive branch using overreaching powers.

I'm a fan of his, but I'm more conservative than most of you here, so that's not a surprise.
 
JustTheTip said:
If you're an originalist, you'll like him. If you're not, you won't. Seems like everybody has respect for him, even if they disagree with his rulings. Interesting choice for Trump, as Gorsuch is not in favor of the executive branch using overreaching powers.

I'm a fan of his, but I'm more conservative than most of you here, so that's not a surprise.
Click to expand...

I'm not an originalist, but I like some of what I read about him, specifically in regards to limiting the expansion of government power.

I'm not worried about where he falls on a graphic, and wondering what we know about his positions on issues like civil rights, campaign finance, weed legalization, and other important issues.

So far, I've heard that he opposes assisted suicide, that he supports employers rights not to cover contraceptives, and something about Chevron. What else do we know?
 
Siro said:
I'm not an originalist, but I like some of what I read about him, specifically in regards to limiting the expansion of government power.

I'm not worried about where he falls on a graphic, and wondering what we know about his positions on issues like civil rights, campaign finance, weed legalization, and other important issues.

So far, I've heard that he opposes assisted suicide, that he supports employers rights not to cover contraceptives, and something about Chevron. What else do we know?
Click to expand...

I've heard that supports assisted suicide.

The biggest thing that I like about him is that he is his own man, and seems to be extremely principled.

Also, I heard that one of his main things is making judicial language concise and easy to understand, unlike a lot of his predecessors before scalia. In that respect, he is similar to scalia.

I read some stuff about him being deeply committed to individual rights, even if they are at odds with what he personally believes in.
 
JustTheTip said:
If you're an originalist, you'll like him. If you're not, you won't. Seems like everybody has respect for him, even if they disagree with his rulings. Interesting choice for Trump, as Gorsuch is not in favor of the executive branch using overreaching powers.

I'm a fan of his, but I'm more conservative than most of you here, so that's not a surprise.
Click to expand...

Why does this surprise you? Trump comes across as the type of person who respects the rule of law, the US Constitution an American values. Even when he is the man with all the power.

I do not care what you think about Trump's ideas, Trump the person is a honest, kind, caring human being that is full of more compassion then all this board combined.
 
^^^^ Boris everyone
 
Boris said:
Why does this surprise you? Trump comes across as the type of person who respects the rule of law, the US Constitution an American values. Even when he is the man with all the power.

I do not care what you think about Trump's ideas, Trump the person is a honest, kind, caring human being that is full of more compassion then all this board combined.
Click to expand...

second best laugh I've had today...

the first was something about who would you take to keep you company if you were stranded on a deserted island

(trying to embed a tweet. we had a thread on this I believe...)

PHP: 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">From a Norwegian paper:<br>- If you were stranded on an island, who would you bring along?<br>- I'll take one for the team and bring along Trump <a href="https://t.co/HMPo5FQQ7K">pic.twitter.com/HMPo5FQQ7K</a></p>&mdash; Kim Rathcke Jensen (@kinablog) <a href="https://twitter.com/kinablog/status/826540378560016389">January 31, 2017</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

(not quite working, I may need to take a refresher course)

ok, here's a screen grab
deserted island tweet.jpg
 
Starting to be calls for a Senate filibuster of the Gorsuch pick. That they know it is a losing battle but it is pure politics now and about the 2018 election. That it will galvanize their base (mentions the ACA fighting igniting the tea party).

Personally I think that is a risky strategy given the 2018 Senate election board. 33 Senate seats are up for re-election in 2018. Only 8 of those are Republicans, 6 of those are likely safe GOP - UT, NE, TN, MS, TX and WY.

Democrats on the other hand have 23 up for grabs and 2 additional seats held by Is that caucus with the Ds. The two Is are likely safe - Sanders and a Maine seat. Roughly a dozen D seats are safe.

Early polls and the 2016 elections indicate roughly 13 toss up seats, 2 R seats and 11 D seats. Of those 11 D seats only 2 are in states that voted for Clinton. NV and VA. So 9 Democrat Senators are up for re-election in states won by the President. It is likely, as of now at least, that the Rs pick up a couple seats in the Senate.

After 2018 the Senate might go from 52-48 to 56-44 or so. Not Filibuster proof but it further dilutes an already weak hand for the Ds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top