 |
|---|
Posted on 11/25/2017 8:26:54 AM PST by Olog-hai
More than 2,000 conservatives in tuxedos and gowns recently filled Union Station’s main hall for a steak dinner and the chance to cheer the man who saved the Supreme Court from liberal control. Justice Neil Gorsuch didn’t disappoint them, just as he hasn’t in his first seven months on the Supreme Court.
“Tonight I can report that a person can be both a publicly committed originalist and textualist and be confirmed to the Supreme Court,” Gorsuch said to sustained applause from members of the Federalist Society, using terms by which conservatives often seek to distinguish themselves from more liberal judges.
The 50-year-old justice has been almost exactly what conservatives hoped for and liberals dreaded when he joined the court in April. He has consistently, even aggressively, lined up with the court’s most conservative justices. He has even split with Chief Justice John Roberts, viewed by some as insufficiently conservative because of his two opinions upholding President Barack Obama’s health law. […]
Liberals’ despair about Gorsuch goes beyond his judicial actions. He occupies a seat once held by Justice Antonin Scalia which they thought Obama would get to fill. But Senate Republicans refused to consider Obama’s nominee, a strategy that paid off when Donald Trump unexpectedly won the White House. …
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
... which they thought Obama would fill (having first emptied) ...
So far, at least, Gorsuch has been a home run. If he holds up in his principles and convictions, Trump has really delivered with this pick.
Yup... Gorsuch is a keeper. We just need another 3 or 4 like him over the next 3, (I mean 7) years.
Justice Neil Gorsuch = deserves to be added to our “THANKFUL FOR” List.
Thank you, too, PDJT, for recognizing the stature of the man you instated on our highest court.
Thank GOD for men like these!
How many conservative people can you name that wanted Hillary to be picking the Supreme Court Justices?
Plus he is young.
And appears to be reasonably healthy.
Anyone who refused to endorse Trump at the convention or in the run-up to the election obviously wanted Hillary. Some were honest enough to say so. At the time, most of them styled themselves as more conservative than the ‘Trumpanzees.’
“So far, at least, Gorsuch has been a home run. If he holds up in his principles and convictions, Trump has really delivered with this pick.”
Fine, but since my taxes will go up by $6 under the Republican plan, I still think Hillary would be a better president.
(the rationale of SOME PEOPLE HERE [not you] regarding the Republican tax cut plan, on another thread)
I’ll say it. Thank You Mitch McConnell.
For what? Obama could have played the old “recess appointment” trick if he really wanted Garland in there. He was counting on Hillary winning and doing just that, most likely. Mitch did very little except posture.
In his albeit small first term he was between Souter and Day O’Connor. So, not super conservative.
You can bet your sweet biffy that mitch mcconell expected hillary to win.
They should be in prison for treason. So should a few other satanists on the Supreme Court. Only ONE “justice” (virtue) System is constitutional—and that is the one which guarantees our Natural Rights from God (Christian worldview)-—and those evil justices have stripped “Right Reason” and “Justice” (virtue/Chrisitnaity) from our Supreme Law of the Land for Stalin’s constitution and his Vice System of irrational, man-made up “laws” (which have to be made “null and void” if we are to remain a Republic).
A just law can only promote “public virtue” to be constitutional—never vices like baby-killing and sodomy and theft (welfare) and slavery (welfare/socialism).
“How many conservative people can you name that wanted Hillary to be picking the Supreme Court Justices?”
Anyone that calls themselves #NeverTrump.
Heck likely the bunch of loons that SWORE Gorsuch was a leftist because of some church he attended.
There were plenty of self-styled ‘true conservatives,’ hoping Trump would crash and burn. One of them notably withheld his endorsement even at the convention. Others openly worked to defeat Trump, claiming as their justification that he wasn’t sufficiently conservative.
It was a two-candidate race. Do the math
| |
|---|
I am never comfortable with the term “natural rights,” nor should conservatives use it. Although there are indeed inalienable rights, we should not introduce an ill-defined term.
Lefties could (and do) abscond with the term and say that “natural rights” include health care, luxury homes,vehicles, money, etc.
We have constitutional rights and any rights not instantiated are reserved to the people per amendments IX and X.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.