About Justice Gorsuch

[Abbey Marie]

https://cdn.meme.am/instances/250x250/61145333/spongebob-patrick-super-happy-omg-im-so-happy-right-now.jpg

[sear]

Too early to know whether Associate Justice Gorsuch will continue his alleged pattern of favoring corporate interests over fundamental citizen / human rights.

[LongTermGuy]

https://cdn.meme.am/instances/250x250/61145333/spongebob-patrick-super-happy-omg-im-so-happy-right-now.jpg

Me too!!!...and Kat..:)

[Abbey Marie]

Too early to know whether Associate Justice Gorsuch will continue his alleged pattern of favoring corporate interests over fundamental citizen / human rights.

1. Sorry, you cannot dampen our happiness
2. You should eventually learn that cherry-picking does not yield truth. It does yield a severely lacking talking point for your agenda, though.
3. More great USSC picks to follow.

[Black Diamond]

I am very happy but we still need some leftists to step down. The "advantage" we have now is the same one that gave us Obamacare and gay marriage in every state.

[sear]

"1. Sorry, you cannot dampen our happiness" A #4

It wouldn't occur to me to attempt it.

"2. You should eventually learn that cherry-picking does not yield truth." A #4

I don't know what you're talking about. Apparently you don't either. But FYI, I've cherry-picked nothing here.

"It does yield a severely lacking talking point for your agenda, though." A #4

That would not merely be amusing, but with an air of plausibility if I had an "agenda".
I invite you to post my alleged agenda. But I know you won't, because I know you can't, because I know I don't.

"3. More great USSC post cks to follow." A #4

To quote an unbridled liberal:

"Optimistic to the point of idiocy" Molly Ivins
Don't look now.
But at least one SCOTUS justice appointed by a Republican has ended up being disappointingly liberal.

Have you forgotten Chief Justice Roberts, an appointee of U.S. President Bush (younger).

President Trump pledged to repeal & replace Obamacare. He failed.
Speaker Ryan tried to repeal & replace Obamacare. He failed too.

Chief Justice Roberts had a shot at at least shooting down the law, AND DIDN'T!!

"1. Sorry, you cannot dampen our happiness" A #4

Your mood is of no concern to me.

But I exercise the objective perspective; not an emotional mood, a cognitive monitor.
No SCOTUS justice appointed by any party's member president has ever ruled to my satisfaction on every case.

Have you forgotten Roe v. Wade was a 7:2 decision?

BD #5

Step down, or fall down.

[NightTrain]

Next up : Ruth Bader Ginsburg's seat, age 84.

Then Kennedy, age 80.

And let's not forget Breyer at the tender age of 78.


I like the sound of a 7-2 SCOTUS.

[Black Diamond]

Next up : Ruth Bader Ginsburg's seat, age 84.

Then Kennedy, age 80.

And let's not forget Breyer at the tender age of 78.


I like the sound of a 7-2 SCOTUS.
The left was upset with Ginsberg for not retiring under Obama. But she knew Hillary would win.

[NightTrain]

The left was upset with Ginsberg for not retiring under Obama. But she knew Hillary would win.

I read a very funny article after Trump won, there's a large gay population extremely worried, suddenly, about her health and they wanted to know what her Kale intake was. They also proposed sending out a Gay Squad to assist her walking up and down stairs & crossing streets - can't be too careful.

I just don't think she's going to make it to 92 with the senile laced stories about her in the last couple of years. And it's not a good thing to take a nap in the middle of arguments.

[Russ]

Too early to know whether Associate Justice Gorsuch will continue his alleged pattern of favoring corporate interests over fundamental citizen / human rights.

Who are you, Al Franken? What a Dem party-line, ridiculous thing to say! :slap:

[Black Diamond]

Who are you, Al Franken? What a Dem party-line, ridiculous thing to say! :slap:
Darn it people like him

[gabosaurus]

I think the opposition to Gorsuch was primarily in retaliation for the GOP Senate refusing to hear Obama's choice for the SCOTUS. Many Dems wanted to vote in favor, but were blocked by the party leadership.

If you read more about Gorsuch, you find his alleged faulty rulings are cherry picked out of thousands of cases he heard. I like the fact that Gorsuch is a strong believer in legal precedent. If an issue has already been decided, he is not going to participate in opposing it. This goes for Second Amendment cases, abortion and same sex marriage, among others.

[Abbey Marie]

I think the opposition to Gorsuch was primarily in retaliation for the GOP Senate refusing to hear Obama's choice for the SCOTUS. Many Dems wanted to vote in favor, but were blocked by the party leadership.

If you read more about Gorsuch, you find his alleged faulty rulings are cherry picked out of thousands of cases he heard. I like the fact that Gorsuch is a strong believer in legal precedent. If an issue has already been decided, he is not going to participate in opposing it. This goes for Second Amendment cases, abortion and same sex marriage, among others.

Gabby, can you please teach Sear what cherry-picking means?

[sear]

"can you please teach Sear what cherry-picking means?" A #13

No.
To teach prerequires a deficit.
But I already know what cherry-picking means, both literally and metaphorically.

Not in the lease clear to me what you misperceive as "cherry-picking".

I doubt you have the wherewithal to express yourself clearly and constructively about it. So I deduce this ends the matter.

[Abbey Marie]

"can you please teach Sear what cherry-picking means?" A #13

No.
To teach prerequires a deficit.
But I already know what cherry-picking means, both literally and metaphorically.

Not in the lease clear to me what you misperceive as "cherry-picking".

I doubt you have the wherewithal to express yourself clearly and constructively about it. So I deduce this ends the matter.

Let's compare law degrees, mister.

[Russ]

"can you please teach Sear what cherry-picking means?" A #13

No.
To teach prerequires a deficit.
But I already know what cherry-picking means, both literally and metaphorically.

Not in the lease clear to me what you misperceive as "cherry-picking".

I doubt you have the wherewithal to express yourself clearly and constructively about it. So I deduce this ends the matter.

Sears, you are a freakin' twit, a moron, and a self-pretentious buffoon. I doubt you could find your BUTT !! with both hands. AND!! you are totally pathetic. I sense you are such an idiot that you don't realize you're an idiot.

Stop trying to talk down to people who are more intelligent than your are. You are clearly not that smart.

[NightTrain]

"can you please teach Sear what cherry-picking means?" A #13

No.
To teach prerequires a deficit.
But I already know what cherry-picking means, both literally and metaphorically.

Not in the lease clear to me what you misperceive as "cherry-picking".

I doubt you have the wherewithal to express yourself clearly and constructively about it. So I deduce this ends the matter.

Hahaha!

You just fucked up.

:popcorn:

[sear]

"Sears, you are a freakin' twit, a moron, and a self-pretentious buffoon." R #16

Thank you R.
Nice to know there's a name for it.

"self-pretentious" R #16 http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9837&stc=1

[sear]

PS
On the radio I just heard VP Pence dropping the gavel rendering official Gorsuch's appointment to the court, now once again a 9 member body.

[Abbey Marie]

Just watched Mr. Gorsuch being sworn-in. I'm looking forward to seeing his Constitutionally sound opinions. It's a great day for patriots.

:joy4:

[Elessar]

Let's compare law degrees, mister.

Oops! That's gonna leave a mark!:laugh:

Of course, the great and astute sage that he pretends to be will never admit it.

[gabosaurus]

Gorsuch will be hailed as a patriot until he makes a decision that displeases conservatives. Then he will be labeled as a traitor. :cool:

[Gunny]

Gorsuch will be hailed as a patriot until he makes a decision that displeases conservatives. Then he will be labeled as a traitor. :cool:oh look ... Captain Obvious is member of DP ....

[aboutime]

Gorsuch will be hailed as a patriot until he makes a decision that displeases conservatives. Then he will be labeled as a traitor. :cool:


gabby. Once again, your trollistic attitude here precedes you. Nobody really knows what any of the NINE will decide. That's the way it is supposed to be. They are JUDGES. If they follow the Constitution, which also means making displeasing decisions by any of them. That's their job for life.
Judge Scalia didn't always like his outcomes all the time. He admitted he didn't always agree..but he did ADHERE to the Constitution. He even admitted. Though he disagreed with ROE V. WADE. IT IS THE LAW.


http://youtu.be/Rj_MhS2u-Pk

[sear]

#21

PBS NewsHour reported this evening that all 9 SCOTUS members got their law degrees at ivy league schools.

If so, in what way can we not regard this as an elitist court (with a Republican majority) *?

* Republicans have long held a reputation as a party of rich white men. And look at the GOP now.
The prescient is rich White $billionaire.
He's nominated a White man to the court.

In contrast weren't President Obama's (a Black man) first to SCOTUS appointments both White women?

I'm not seeing a whole lot of diversity in Trump's cabinet.

No crime per se in any of that.

BUT !!

Would it be any wonder that a 100% elitist court would tend toward rulings that benefit elitist Republicans?

[Abbey Marie]

#21

PBS NewsHour reported this evening that all 9 SCOTUS members got their law degrees at ivy league schools.

If so, in what way can we not regard this as an elitist court (with a Republican majority) *?

* Republicans have long held a reputation as a party of rich white men. And look at the GOP now.
The prescient is rich White $billionaire.
He's nominated a White man to the court.

In contrast weren't President Obama's (a Black man) first to SCOTUS appointments both White women?

I'm not seeing a whole lot of diversity in Trump's cabinet.

No crime per se in any of that.

BUT !!

Would it be any wonder that a 100% elitist court would tend toward rulings that benefit elitist Republicans?


By all means, let's appoint the guy flipping burgers at McDonalds for the USSC. He will be so non-elitist, and that is the most important criterion for someone who must interpret the law and truly understand the Constitution and precedent.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Little-Acorn]

Too early to know whether Associate Justice Gorsuch will continue his alleged pattern of favoring corporate interests over fundamental citizen / human rights.
He favors the law.

If the law "favors" corporate interests, then yes, he favors corporate interests. And if it doesn't, he doesn't.

In other words, he's doing exactly what a judge (now Justice) should do.

If you don't want judges favoring corporate interests, stop making laws that favor corporate interests.

Some people just don't get it.

[Little-Acorn]

Gorsuch will be hailed as a patriot until he makes a decision that violates the Constitution. Then he will be labeled as a traitor. :cool:

Fixed it for you.

[sear]

"By all means, let's appoint the guy flipping burgers at McDonalds for the USSC. He will be so non-elitist, and that is the most important criterion" A #26

a) I never asserted diversity is "the most important criterion". That's your assertion.
I'm not denying it's absurd. I simply point out that YOU are the one that introduced it.

"that is the most important criterion for someone who must interpret the law and truly understand the Constitution and precedent." A #26

b) You seem to believe an ivy league law school degree provides better jurists than jurists that got their law degree elsewhere.
Perhaps so.

BUT !!

If so, where is your proof of it?
I have no evidence on it one way or another, but wouldn't presume it (as you may have done here).

I did read a study on U.S. military officers (like associate justices, federal employees sworn to uphold the Constitution).
The premise was that U.S. military officers that graduated from a U.S. war college, Annapolis or West Point, were superior military officers. So they did the study.
The result of the study was, there wasn't enough of a difference to draw a preference.
There are some excellent officers that never enrolled in a U.S. war college. And there are some mediocre officers that did.

Is it a similar story for ivy league law schools?
I wouldn't rule it out.

"Some people just don't get it." LA #27

There there.
I think Associate Justice Gorsuch gets it.

[aboutime]

Fixed it for you.



gabby changed her words in the RED because she is totally ignorant about the parts of the Constitution...she despises, but wants a sitting JUDGE to abuse?

That would be like gabby waiting for Bill Clinton to admit he's a PERVERT.