View Full Version : New SCOTUS Nominee
The Reaper
01-31-2017, 19:09
Looks like it is Gorsuch.
Time to do some research, but he is saying the right words so far.
TR
SCOTUS blog has a write up.
Judge Neil Gorsuch – Colorado native and Washington, D.C., veteran
http://www.scotusblog.com/2017/01/judge-neil-gorsuch-colorado-native-washington-d-c-insider/
Looks like it is Gorsuch.
Time to do some research, but he is saying the right words so far.
TR
I don't know a thing about that fella(too busy to get on top of everything), hopefully the feedback here is positive.
I'm just eternally grateful that it is not Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders selecting the Supreme Court nominees.
Even if that's the only thing achieved in the next 4 years, it could be the difference between holding the free world together and a less positive alternative.
SCOTUS blog has a write up.
Judge Neil Gorsuch – Colorado native and Washington, D.C., veteran
http://www.scotusblog.com/2017/01/judge-neil-gorsuch-colorado-native-washington-d-c-insider/
He's a young fella!
Justices Ginsburg and Kennedy are next. Insurance actuaries would safely see them replaced in this new term.
He's a young fella!
Justices Ginsburg and Kennedy are next. Insurance actuaries would safely see them replaced in this new term.
She'll be 84 next month and he is 80...
CAARNG 68W
01-31-2017, 22:09
SCOTUS blog has a write up.
Judge Neil Gorsuch – Colorado native and Washington, D.C., veteran
http://www.scotusblog.com/2017/01/judge-neil-gorsuch-colorado-native-washington-d-c-insider/
veteran
Huh?
So the conservative trifecta would be this nominee be confirmed, justice ginsburg checks out, and justice Kennedy retires before trump leaves office.
Huh?
D.C. veteran...as in experienced the swamp at an early age...read the blog.
"President Ronald Reagan’s choice of Gorsuch’s mother, Anne Gorsuch Burford, to head the Environmental Protection Agency in 1981 brought the Denver teenager to Washington, where he attended Bethesda’s Georgetown Preparatory School and won a national debate championship."
"Gorsuch began his legal career in the early 1990s with a series of prestigious clerkships – for Judge David Sentelle of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and on the U.S. Supreme Court for retired Justice Byron White, who shared him with Justice Anthony Kennedy. If nominated and confirmed, Gorsuch would be the first former law clerk to serve on the bench alongside his or her old boss."
bblhead672
02-01-2017, 08:36
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/who-is-neil-gorsuch-bio-facts-background-political-views-234437
"He attended Harvard Law with former President Barack Obama. On Tuesday, Obama's former ethics czar, Norm Eisen, another classmate, tweeted: "Hearing rumors Trump's likely Supreme Court pick is Neil Gorsuch, my (and President Obama's!) 1991 Harvard Law classmate.If so, a great guy!""
Pausing to contemplate that Judge Gorsuch was classmate of Obama and praised by another classmate who worked in Obama administration.
Roguish Lawyer
02-01-2017, 08:47
The General Counsel's office of the Great Right-Wing Conspiracy has signed off.
nousdefions
02-01-2017, 09:05
The louder the looney left screams, the better the pick becomes.
bblhead672
02-01-2017, 12:16
It is funny how they were class mates yet come out with opposite points of view on this country and the legalities.
Upon review of the left's hysteria and exploding heads I feel he must be a good nominee! If Pelosi thinks he's satan then he must be a solid pick.
rubberneck
02-01-2017, 12:28
It is funny how they were class mates yet come out with opposite points of view on this country and the legalities.
Or how one tried to destroy America as we know it, while the other will act to restore it.
atticus finch
02-01-2017, 17:37
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/01/judge_neil_gorsuch_some_cause_for_concern.html
From the article:
" On the other hand, there is reason for pause with Judge Gorsuch's record. Judge Gorsuch joined in one opinion, United States v. Rodriguez, 739 F.3d 481 (11th Cir. 2013), which causes us to have some concern about his understanding of the relationship between the government and an armed citizenry. To be fair, Judge Gorsuch did not write the Rodriguez opinion – his colleague, Judge Bobby Baldock, was the author. Nevertheless, Judge Gorsuch joined the opinion. He could have filed a principled dissenting opinion, or even a concurring opinion agreeing only in the judgment.
The facts of the case are these. A New Mexico policeman observed Mr. Rodriguez, a convenience store clerk, carrying a concealed handgun. Carrying a concealed loaded handgun is illegal in New Mexico without a permit but legal if one has a license to do so. The officer, upon seeing a Rodriguez's handgun, detained him, then – acting first and asking questions later – forcibly disarmed Rodriguez. After finding out that Rodriguez did not, in fact, have a license to carry and, indeed, was a convicted felon, the officer placed him under arrest.
Of course, hard cases make bad law. But the precedent from the Rodriguez opinion will affect police-citizen relations in New Mexico, and possibly elsewhere in the Tenth Circuit, for many years to come. Not bothering to figure out the legality of Rodriguez's firearm before detaining and disarming him, the officer's initial actions would have been the same even if Mr. Rodriguez had been a lawful gun owner.
According to the 10th Circuit's opinion, the police are justified in forcibly disarming every armed citizen based on nothing more than the presence of a concealed firearm. This allows the police to treat every law-abiding gun owner like a criminal – which, in many cases we have seen, includes rough treatment such as grabbing him, twisting his arm behind his back, slamming him down on the ground, and handcuffing him. Far too many police officers do not like anyone to be armed other than themselves and have taken it upon themselves to intimidate those who dare to exercise Second Amendment rights. Under the Rodriguez decision, only after being forcibly disarmed and detained would a citizen be entitled to demonstrate that he was lawfully exercising his Second Amendment rights. "
Not what I'd call a deal-breaker type decision, less than desirable but no matter how you break it down. He is still FAR better than anything we would be facing from the hildabeast.
I am thus far excited about Gorsuch and what he could bring to SCOTUS. As someone with strong pro-life views, I am eager for the day when Roe v. Wade is ruled unconstitutional, as IMO it should have been from the very beginning...
Badger52
02-02-2017, 20:32
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/01/judge_neil_gorsuch_some_cause_for_concern.html
From the article:
Not what I'd call a deal-breaker type decision, less than desirable but no matter how you break it down. He is still FAR better than anything we would be facing from the hildabeast.
Appreciate the reference; I find that very troubling and would want to have him asked about his views (especially in light of the current perceptions in general & specific incidents periodically) of a "detain (or worse) & sort out later" mentality. Even the really decent ones have individual views expressed at times that are windows into the space between their ears. The robe doesn't make them perfect; and that included Scalia.
I present this as a PSA with local knowledge.
Remember the discussions revolving around Obama's church and his pastor?
Please take a moment to think on that...
Gorsuch is an usher at his Episcopal church, which advocates for gun control and climate change activism. His church routinely sends representatives to the Colorado legislature to testify against any restoration of second amendment rights and were quite vocal during the 2013 gun control bills that were passed here. His church also embraces same-sex marriage and has conducted several ceremonies.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/02/01/neil-gorsuch-belongs-to-a-notably-liberal-church-and-would-be-the-first-protestant-on-the-court-in-years/
That being said, a review of Judge Gorsuch writings and rulings appear quite conservative and constitutional. He is being actively supported by most pro-gun rights organizations.
Airbornelawyer
03-15-2017, 15:17
I present this as a PSA with local knowledge.
Remember the discussions revolving around Obama's church and his pastor?
Please take a moment to think on that...
Gorsuch is an usher at his Episcopal church, which advocates for gun control and climate change activism. His church routinely sends representatives to the Colorado legislature to testify against any restoration of second amendment rights and were quite vocal during the 2013 gun control bills that were passed here. His church also embraces same-sex marriage and has conducted several ceremonies.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/02/01/neil-gorsuch-belongs-to-a-notably-liberal-church-and-would-be-the-first-protestant-on-the-court-in-years/
That being said, a review of Judge Gorsuch writings and rulings appear quite conservative and constitutional. He is being actively supported by most pro-gun rights organizations.
He would be replacing Justice Antonin Scalia, who was a devout Catholic, but still wrote opinions or joined in decisions which did not accord with the views of the Church in Rome or the US Conference of Catholic Bishops. Cardinal McCarrick, the then-Archbishop of Washington, for example, was pro-gun control and spoke out publicly in 2004 when the House of Representatives tried to reform DC's Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975, the same act at issue in DC v. Heller, for which Justice Scalia wrote the opinion. McCarrick was no longer archbishop when Heller was decided, and I have no idea where Cardinal Wuerl stands. I don't think the Roman Catholic Church as a whole has an official view on gun control, though the Church is pretty much with the left on the global warming bandwagon.
Of course, I am a Southern Baptist, so the Catholic view doesn't really matter to me, unless the Church were to start intimidating parishioners who didn't abide by a particular political agenda. I'm not sure if the Southern Baptist Convention has an official position on gun control, though I think the catechism on gun control was "steady position, aiming point, breathing control, trigger squeeze". I might be confusing that with something else. ;)
Badger52
03-15-2017, 16:31
I'm not sure if the Southern Baptist Convention has an official position on gun control, though I think the catechism on gun control was "steady position, aiming point, breathing control, trigger squeeze". I might be confusing that with something else. ;)Not a Catholic, but converted son showed me RC catechism pretty clearly articulating the sanctity of life, including one's own as well as loved ones & the duty to defend, and making a clear distinction between murder & self-defense. The short of it was that, if deadly force in proper defense of life happens to result in death of the bad actor, it's unfortunate - but falls under the heading of "play stupid games win stupid prizes."