I don’t trust Gorsuch at all; he may look “good” on paper, but after what he said, this past week, even out of context or not, the bloom is off his rose.
MAJOR CORRECTION: The Republican Party did NOT start with Thomas Jefferson, it began With Abraham Lincoln. However I will give Jefferson credit for starting the ideology of the Libertarian Party which is fine with me.
Are you concerned that Neil Gorsuch belongs to a far-left church?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3523436/posts
I sure hope he turns out to be a good one, if not we may be finished as a country.
Prayers for his confirmation.
During the campaign, Hillary Clinton stayed mum on her judicial plans. After all, she didn't want to admit that she'd follow in the footsteps of past liberals and choose judges determined to impose their leftist views on the rest of us.It is precisely the case that the voters had a choice - either a candidate whose nomination of Gorsuch would fulfill an explicit promise, or a candidate who would nominate Garland - or whoever suited her.In contrast, candidate Trump provided voters with a list of potential nominees, all serious jurists who respect the Constitution as written, rather than frustrated legislators seeking to use the document for social engineering. Neil Gorsuch is such a candidate
The Democrats had their chance to claim that one - just one - of Trump’s list of a score of judges was "outside the mainstream.” Had they been confident of making their point to the voters about any of the listed jurists, they could have said, “If you vote for Trump, Gorsuch (or whoever they thought vulnerable) will be nominated to SCOTUS.” They did not make their case, and it is too late to complain now.
If they now claim that Gorsuch is out of the mainstream, that will prove that they are out of the mainstream. Excellent article, with which I heartily concur.
I would only add that, for the reasons above, there is no justification for respecting a filibuster of the Gorsuch confirmation vote.
Finally, there's an intangible point. Justice Anthony Kennedy is 80 and reportedly considering retirement. Gorsuch was one of his clerks. By choosing someone so well qualified who worked for Kennedy, the president is signaling to Kennedy that the president can be trusted to choose a successor. That would allow President Trump to edge the Court to the right, with potentially lasting impact.Kennedy probably would have retired if Hillary had filled the Scalia seat with a reliable pinko; in that case one of the five pinkos would be the “swing” vote, to the extent that there would then be such. With a conservative (we devoutly hope) justice in Scalia’s seat, Kennedy will remain the swing vote who, whether he goes left or right, will always prevail.That is heady stuff, and IMHO Kennedy is not going to retire until his health requires it. Or until/unless RBG leaves the bench and makes Roberts the swing vote . . .
My gut says he’s a Souter
Is that the same Neil Gorsuch who told a Democrat U.S. Senator that Trump's criticism of the judiciary was “disheartening” and “demoralizing?”
Can anyone at Free Republic imagine Scalia saying something like that?
I was instantly suspicious of Neil Gorsuch when I found out that he clerked for Supreme Court “swing voters” Byron White and Anthony Kennedy.
Gorsuch is another center-left John Roberts - if we're lucky.
Unless what he said about Trump was taken totally out of context...IOW, if it was all true...he can’t be trusted. He’ll just be another phony like John Roberts.