BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee

Subject: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: Joe Offer
Date: 31 Jan 17 - 09:49 PM

On January 31, 2017, "President" Trump (I hate that term) nominated Judge Neil Gorsuch for Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. I know nothing about the man, but his credentials as reported in Wikipedia are impressive. He's 49 years old, so he's going to be with us a long time if the Senate confirms him.
From the little I've read, he seems to be an ordinary conservative, not an extremist. It will be interesting to see what comes out about him over the next few weeks.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: DMcG
Date: 01 Feb 17 - 01:32 AM

I know nothing about the man, but he does seem to be what you would anticipate.

In general, I think the US system does a much better job at separing powers than the UK, but when the timing is wrong and you have a fairly clean sweep by one party is becomes weak. So we have a president carrying out actions which may be unconstitutional appointing the people who decide whether it is. True, it can be held up for months like Obama's choice, but not for years. The system is what it is, but I think these odd circumstances reveal it to be less robust then we may have thought.

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Feb 17 - 05:21 AM

Well he's hardly anti-establishment, is he? I suppose our UK supreme court judges have or had certain political allegiances, but I would have hoped that they were selected on the grounds of knowledge, experience and inviolable integrity. Ours are all establishment people but they still managed to tell Theresa May where to get off last week. My rule of thumb is that if the Daily Mail doesn't like it, then it can't be all bad.

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: Stu
Date: 01 Feb 17 - 05:32 AM

On the R4 today programme the US commentator thought that the appointment wouldn't alter rate philosophical makeup of the Supreme Court. The bloke speaking (I didn't catch his name) thought he was very much a 'by the book' sort of Judge whose main frame of reference is the Constitution and making sure his judgements uphold the spirit of both that and the law.

So he doesn't seem to be a patsy, and it makes you wonder why Trump sacked Sally Yates for suggesting his ban might be unlawful and therefore indefensible in court.

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: Joe Offer
Date: 01 Feb 17 - 05:45 AM

It would be very difficult for Trump to nominate a justice more conservative that Antonin Scalia, so the new justice won't upset the balance in the Supreme Court unless he turns out to be a liberal.
Over the years, we have had unexpectedly refreshing votes from a number of justices who were expected to be conservative. Let's hope the new guy is like that.
I don't think the Democrats are hoping for a liberal justice - they've been quite realistic in their expectations, and I think that's healthy.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: mkebenn
Date: 01 Feb 17 - 08:30 AM

Joe, I think His Honor is more consevative than Scalia. I'm happy with seven Supremes, and I'll be happier with seven when Kennedy retires this summer. We gave them a perfectly moderate choice, and they wouldn't even give him a hearing. F@#$ 'em. Mike

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: Jack Campin
Date: 01 Feb 17 - 08:49 AM

very much a 'by the book' sort of Judge whose main frame of reference is the Constitution and making sure his judgements uphold the spirit of both that and the law.

Would anybody seeking any kind of public office in the US declare publicly that the Constitution was a pile of dogshit and ought to be ignored?

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: gillymor
Date: 01 Feb 17 - 08:56 AM

I knew that name was familiar. His mom, Ann Gorsuch, tried to dismantle the EPA as it's first female administrator, under Reagan, so he comes from questionable bloodlines at best.

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: Rapparee
Date: 01 Feb 17 - 08:58 AM

"In our legal order, it is for Congress, not the courts, to write new laws… a judge who likes every outcome he reaches, is very likely a bad judge, stretching for results he prefers, rather than those the law demands."            
                              --Neil Gorsuch

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: michaelr
Date: 01 Feb 17 - 09:27 AM

He meets Trump's litmus test, willing to kill Roe v. Wade.

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 01 Feb 17 - 11:05 AM

I'm not a big enough fool to think a Republican President would ever nominate someone I'd be cheering and handing out high-fives for. But Gorsuch doesn't seem to be as nasty as the late SOB he's replacing, and I guess that's better than nothing. The shit well from which previous GOP Presidents have drawn the likes of Scalia, Alito, and Thomas must be empty or Trump would surely have made another trip to it.

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Feb 17 - 02:08 PM

So Trump is now going to change the rules to get him in if the Democrats try to block the appointment. Oh, yanks, what have you done!

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 01 Feb 17 - 04:10 PM

Trump can't change the rules. We're talking Senate rules here, and Trump has no authority over them. What he's done is to ask Senate Majority Leader McConnell to change the number of votes needed for confirmation from 60 to a simple majority of 51, if that's what it takes to get Gorsuch confirmed. It's probably not going to happen. If the rule were changed, the next time there's a Democratic majority in the Senate, they'll only need 51 votes to confirm Democratic nominees or defeat Republican nominees. It's the type of change that can easily come back and bite you on the ass. It's also the sort of thing someone as rash and short-sighted as Trump would encourage. If it poses a problem for future administrations, it's not his problem.

The Democrats are still angry about McConnell's refusing to even hold hearings for Merrick Garland, Obama's nominee for the vacancy, and they'll probably try to punish the Republicans by blocking Gorsuch. But there are four years of Republican administration ahead. The Democrats will eventually have to vote to confirm someone or be accused of even greater obstructionism than the Republicans under Obama. They only blocked Obama's guy for not quite a year. McConnell's probably telling his Democratic colleagues, "This guy's not so bad. Toss him and Trump will probably find someone you'll hate even more."

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: Rapparee
Date: 01 Feb 17 - 07:36 PM

I can't wait for Congress to grow spines.

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: Joe Offer
Date: 01 Feb 17 - 08:54 PM

The recent tradition has been to select Supreme Court justices with impressive academic credentials, and Gorsuch certainly has such credentials. Many, maybe most of the justices have not voted according to predictions - at least not all the time. For the most part, the justices are distinguished jurists, not political hacks. They make their decisions thoughtfully, and most avoid political influences. Clarence Thomas is an exception, but even he has his moments of brilliance and integrity. Scalia was consistently the most conservative member of the court, but he was a philosophical conservative and not a leaf blown by the winds of politics. I can't imagine that mkebenn is correct in saying that Gorsuch is to the right of Scalia, but I suppose that time will tell.

Now, if Trump had wanted to unite the country with a grand gesture, he could have nominated Merrick Garland, and he would have had an excellent Supreme Court justice with credentials conservative to satisfy most Republicans.

But I don't think that Gorsuch is a bad choice. I suspect he will give us some pleasant surprises.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: robomatic
Date: 01 Feb 17 - 08:54 PM

The subject was Neil Gorsuch today on Fresh Air. Quite interesting.

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: robomatic
Date: 01 Feb 17 - 09:32 PM

A couple of interesting reference sites:


National Constitution Center

scotusblog

And, what the hell, an article from The New Yorker, the greatest USian magazine, about the Magna Carta:

Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights, and the hold of time

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: Joe Offer
Date: 02 Feb 17 - 12:04 AM

Robomatic sez: The New Yorker, the greatest USian magazine

Hadn't thought of that, but you may be right. It certainly is a delight to read the New Yorker. I should do it more often.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Feb 17 - 08:45 AM

I had a quick look at The New Yorker and it seems to have an extremely heavy "liberal" bias, the top twenty articles were either direct attacks on the new President or "liberal" propaganda....I am amazed that anyone could find this publication unbiased....or a "delight to read" unless one is exceptionally politically partisan.

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: Stu
Date: 02 Feb 17 - 08:59 AM

The cartoons in the New Yorker are often excellent too.

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Feb 17 - 09:02 AM

Nice one Stu   :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 02 Feb 17 - 09:05 AM

I do wish our "Scottish" member would stop with the quotes on liberal. It's so "pretentious."

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Feb 17 - 09:17 AM

Do you mean "akenaton?"

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Feb 17 - 09:31 AM

"It's so "pretentious.""
Not really Acme - all fascists hate liberalism
Stop picking on him - you can only stamp on the rats when you can see them
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Feb 17 - 09:35 AM

And brace yourself for his latest bout of mysogyny on the "We're off" thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Feb 17 - 10:48 AM

Your punctuation is letting you down again Steve. :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Feb 17 - 11:03 AM

Since you mention it Acme there are quite a few liberals on here Joe, Bill D, Amos, even PFR... and most of the conservatives are relatively tolerant.....

As you seem to have settled in amongst the liberals "in name only", I'm afraid you have disqualified yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Feb 17 - 11:18 AM

"Your punctuation is letting you down again Steve. :0)"
Beats taking responsibility for your opinions, I suppose
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: robomatic
Date: 02 Feb 17 - 11:48 AM

'Ake', if I may so address you.
I did not say that The New Yorker was non partisan, but I personally make a distinction between the 'knee-jerk' publications of any genre (including this hallowed forum), and venues where thought and analysis are applied. The New Yorker may well stock a liberal lineup of writers, but I'm willing to stake a claim that it is not exclusively so, and that in reading 'em you will feel more informed than beaten up.

Interestingly, there appears to be a long and deep hostility between The New Yorker and The New York Times. I have not investigated this, but I've seen references between the two which were downright nasty.

Also, there is a certain hubris in saying something is 'best' or 'greatest'. There are many fine publications in the English speaking world, and English as a language has achieved a world-wide success that dwarfs its origins like no other language (than Spanish). (One of the reasons I thought it was a mistake to Brexit).

Another fine American thought venue, which will definitely be thought of as liberal is NPR. Particularly the show "Fresh Air" with Terry Gross, who IMO is a National Treasure. She will interview anyone and ask the questions you really want to hear answered. Legendary is her interview with Gene Simmons and another that I heard when it happened, with Bill O'Reilly (he walked out). I first heard the term: "credit default swap" on her program a couple of years before the economy crashed and enabled Obama to wind the '08 election.

And let's not forget the words of Stephen Colbert: "Reality has a well-known liberal bias."

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Feb 17 - 12:11 PM

My punctuation was rock-solid. It was my spelling (or, rather, my proofreading on this pesky iPad Mini) that let me down. The word is misogyny. Odd that you don't know the difference between spelling and punctuation. Or maybe it's not so odd, after all you don't know the difference between tolerance and bigotry, fascism and democracy and socialism and alt-right either.

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Feb 17 - 12:34 PM

No you silly boy Steve, it was the OTHER mistake I was talking about. I didn't expect you to be able to spell "misogyny", as you obviously don't know how to apply it.

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Feb 17 - 01:52 PM

Robomatic, I left a post thanking you for your civil response and apologising for being hasty in my suspicion of the New Yorker.
It has been deleted by admin, for what reason I know naught.

In any case I found your post informative and don't wish you to think that I am being dismissive and failing to respond.

I would be delighted if you referred to me as Ake,

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: michaelr
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 06:44 PM

Alleged 2012 quote from Neil Gorsuch:

"Our clear goal must be the advancement of the white race and separation of the white and black races. This goal must include freeing of the American media and government from subservient Jewish interests."

Nah, nothing extremist there, Joe.

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: robomatic
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 10:58 PM

michaelr:
Thanks for contributing to the heat and not the light. "Alleged" says it all.
From what I've heard about Neil Gorsuch, he is as likely to have said it or believed it as an elephant is likely to sprout wings and fly (although the Republicans did come close).

The primitive and reactive way a lot of anti-Trump folks are going about their protests is doing nothing to strengthen the anti-Trump movement.

What's really sad is there is a lot of good information from knowledgeable sources out there. I've shared a few in this thread already.

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: michaelr
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 12:41 AM

And how do you know a knowledgeable source if you don't already have the knowledge?

I said "alleged" because I don't know if it's true. Do you?

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: DMcG
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 04:58 AM

If the light of the decision by a Washington State judge that Trump's travel ban breaches the first amendment, the fact that Gorsuch was nominated in part because he has a "textualist' interpretation of the Constitution could prove interestibg. Trump wanted him to do that for the 2nd amendment - it does not seem to have occurred to Mr T he might be like that for all the rest of the Constitution as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: robomatic
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 12:11 PM

michaelr:

Yes. I know it's not true. You took an obvious and STUPID cheap shot. That is the work of a troll. Note that I am not advocating for Gorsuch, I am advocating for truth. You come to a forum with a garbage comment and act like it's a contribution. It's an offense.

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: Donuel
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 12:26 PM

Gorsuch has ruled that Corporations are living breathing human beings endowed with all human rights while at the same time is called an originalist. That gives me pause. I am listening to Pence talk about Gorsuch getting the seat one way or another.

By a constitutional loophole Merrill got screwed and his seat stolen.
Some push back is expected.

Justice is officially politicized.

There are a possible 3 more seats for Tromp to pick

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: michaelr
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 12:31 PM

You call me a troll but you do not answer my question: How do you know?

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: robomatic
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 12:54 PM

michaelr you brought your 'alleged' in here and YOU provided no source. Learn to do research or GTHO. The only thing worse than a troll is someone too ignorant to know when they're quoting crap.

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: michaelr
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 02:02 PM

Still not answering my question.

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: michaelr
Date: 05 Feb 17 - 01:00 AM

So, obviously, robomatic's assertion that he knows "the truth" about the supposed 2012 Gorsuch quote is not backed up by any facts. That makes it an opinion, does it not?

I did not claim the quote I posted to be truth. It's an internet meme. I have no way of verifying whether it is or isn't.

Robomatic claims to know that it's untrue, but he can't back up that claim with any corroboration. He thinks calling me a troll will be sufficient - well, it isn't.

The question is, in this time of "alternative facts", how do we determine what's real and what is not?

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: Joe Offer
Date: 05 Feb 17 - 01:42 AM

If you go back and forth, accusing each other of being trolls, that doesn't add much to the discussion. Do you really think other people are interested in that sort of pettiness?
Get back to the topic of discussion, please.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: michaelr
Date: 05 Feb 17 - 11:35 AM

He called me a troll, Joe. I did no such thing.

It's a legitimate question to ask how we know what we think we know. The quote I cited and took care to label as "alleged" may be from Gorsuch, or it may have been fabricated to discredit him. I don't know, but robomatic claims he knows. I'd like him to back that up, because I want to know.

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: robomatic
Date: 05 Feb 17 - 12:05 PM

Back with the Grownups

Gorsuch seems to be an outstandingly good pick from the point of view of the extreme Conservatives. He has not specifically ruled on abortion but he has ruled on enough 'parallel' issues to be thought of as likely to oppose it on his approach to Constitutional issues. He is also bright, likable, relatively young and healthy.

This might be evidence that Trump knows how to listen to smart people.

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: robomatic
Date: 05 Feb 17 - 12:37 PM

How Trump's Supreme Court Could Overturn Roe v. Wade Without Overturning It

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: Greg F.
Date: 08 Feb 17 - 06:56 PM

U.S. Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch told a Democratic senator he found Donald Trump's comments "disheartening" and "demoralizing" when the president criticized the judiciary over a federal court order that blocked his immigration ban.

Gorsuch's strong criticism of Trump could help convince skeptical Democrats, angry over the president's reaction to the travel-ban ruling, to give Gorsuch more serious consideration.

Only if the Democratic Senators are monumentally stupid enough to fall for this obvious Trumpist ploy to garner support.

Subject: RE: BS: Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee
From: DMcG
Date: 09 Feb 17 - 02:01 AM

It is a mistake to read too much into the specific words chosen during a dialogue but both of these - demoralising, disheartening - are very much of the "I'm giving up, can't be bothered to fight any more" flavour. Neither is a call to arms to protect the constitution which both the judges and Trump are under oath to defend.