Good luck Mitch
Seems Gorsuch likes to not comment on anything. Wonder what he is hiding.
Filibuster. Every Democrat. Do it. Gorsuch is a snake in the grass just waiting to poison and kill individual rights and liberties and set corporations and the 1% on a free ride to do whatever they want.
And Garland, and the illegitimacy of Trumpski, etc.
Was going to post the same. He didn’t answer literally anything. What a weasel.
N that would have worked maybe ten-fifteen years ago, but in the ‘age of Trump’ a pimple is far more innocent than most Trump cabinet members.
Fat Tony’s omertà survives even his precipitous descent into Perdition.
Gorsuch is a made man in the Republicans mob.
Unwilling to cross even a dead man who publicly called Voting Rights a “perpetuation of racial entitlement”.
But someday the GOP will progress from their Three-Fifths-of-a-Person position.
(To a new and improved Four-Fifths-of-a-Person compromise.)
Was the judicial ‘fifth amendment’ on things the Senators had the right to ask about and expect an honest answer.
Be nice if someone had said something like: “It’s the job you’ve been nominated for - reviewing the work of other judges, and, sometimes, the work of previous Supreme Court Justices. If you’re too reticent to comment on the work of other judges, perhaps you’re not suited to the job.”
He’s singing from the Chief Justice Roberts hymn book. The fact this guy has consistently refused to answer the Democrats questions should render him unfit to serve…he’s hiding something.
Maybe it’s a sign that Gorsuch is just too diffident to perform the job of a Supreme Court Justice with any confidence or independence. Of course he isn’t, but if that’s the role Gorsuch is going to play in the hearings, then call him on it. If he rises to the bait, he’ll look temperamental; if he doesn’t, he’ll look weak.
Salon has a decent article of Franken nailing Gorsuch on the plain meaning rule, i.e., a trucker was fired for leaving his trailer (with frozen brakes) as he himself was freezing in -14F temps.
From there, Franken turned to the dissent Gorsuch wrote. As Franken described it, the issue came down to a “plain meaning” rule: “When the plain meaning of a statute is clear on its face, when its meaning is obvious, courts have no business looking beyond the meaning to the statute’s purpose.” That’s what Gorsuch relied on in his ruling.
“But the plain meaning rule has an exception,” Franken continued. “When using the plain meaning rule would create an absurd result, courts should depart from the plain meaning,” he said. “It is absurd to say this company is within its rights to fire him because he made the choice of possibly dying from freezing to death or causing other people to die possibly by driving an unsafe vehicle. That’s absurd.”
The judge who is trying to fill Judge Garland’s seat said what!?
Scalia’s dead. And this is about a matter that was resolved by Congress, not one that’s going to come before the Supreme Court. And Gorsuch can’t comment, especially when the question is one about the principle of separation of powers and Scalia’s contempt for it when it didn’t suit his ideology? What are these hearings suppose to be about? Gorsuch is mocking the Senate’s duty to confirm or not. Why not just put all power in the executive branch and be done with these useless legislators and jurists?
GOR-skunk.
that’s funny and very true.
Thinking back to the other day’s hearing and question about abortion Gorsuch was asked if he and Trump had talked about abortion, and he said no. Was there a follow up to “Did any one in the Trump administration talk to you about abortion?” And since this is Trump and his chumps “Did any one not currently working our of the WH but is named Mercer or working on Mercer’s behalf talk to you about abortion?”
Trump promised his supporters a Right To Life judge how would he know if this is the right guy, with the right position, to replace the right dead Supreme Court Justice?
“It seems to me that he is substituting his own personal views for the facts in the record,” Franken said. “Do you agree a willingness to engage in this kind of speculation could be perceived as judicial activism?”
“Respectfully, I just don’t think it’s appropriate for me to comment on the work of my superiors or Justice Scalia’s words at oral argument or any other justice’s comments at oral argument,” Gorsuch replied.
But that was not the question Senator Franken was asking, was it? The Senator was citing an example of an approach to judicial decision making and asking if Gorsuch thought that approach was appropriate. It was a completely fair question that deserved an answer. Gorsuch pretended it was a different question altogether, thereby avoiding it. Which proves only that he is a slimy POS who has some lawyer’s skills.
And here is the great part of this whole thing:
Franken has taken a whole lot of crap from the opposition for having been nothing more than a comedian prior to becoming a Senator. Seems the honorable Al understands more about the law than the idiots who criticize him. And as Al said himself, he is a master of absurdity and this was a perfect example.
So opposition, stick it where the sun don’t shine.
Scalia = Ignorant Racist Fat Fuck
Gorsuch= Ignorant Racist Fit Fuck
Cut from the same mold
The fit part is worrisome as he will be with us for the next 30 years.
I’ll probably be dead …but the rest of you youngsters are in deep shit