PDA

View Full Version : "Demoralizing" and "Disheartening"


Teach
02-08-2017, 06:12 PM
“Demoralizing” and “Disheartening”. Those were the two words used today by the POTUS-appointee to be the next Supreme Court Justice, Neil Gorsuch. Gorsuch used those words in speaking with Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Connecticut). The comments were ostensibly made in regard to the spate of unkind remarks that POTUS has leveled against The Judiciary.

Personally, as I step back, I was impressed with Gorsuch’s comments when he was recently “rolled out” as President Trump’s appointee to the Supreme Court. Although I have a differing judicial outlook, I respected Gorsuch’s candor. His judicial philosophy reminds me of the late Justice Antonin Scalia, I man with whom I also differed but respected.

Yet, I wonder (nearly 75 years of living on the face of this earth will do that) how much of Gorsuch’s remarks were simply candor and how much of them were posturing.

Fact: Neil Gorsuch needs Democratic Senators’ approval. I doubt they can prevent his confirmation to the High Court, but they can certainly delay it.

Judicially speaking, let’s look at what’s going on currently. As we speak, a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is taking up President Trump’s 7-country travel ban. There are various possibilities. One would be to send it back to the district court. Or, they could decide in favor of the Federal government, or they could rule against. In any event, one way or another, it is likely that this case will wind up in SCOTUS.

Yet, there are currently only eight members – four liberal-leaning justices, four conservative leaning justices - on the High Court. A 4-to-4
tie would let stand whatever the 9th Circuit decides.

That’s why if appointee Gorsuch is confirmed expeditiously by the U.S. Senate, and he is sitting on the Supreme Court when this travel ban case reaches them, the outcome will be 5-to-4 “a slam-dunk”.

TJDave
02-08-2017, 06:18 PM
You never know for certain how a justice will come down. Scalia had it right when he said:

"Just send us someone smart."

Jess Hawsen Arown
02-08-2017, 06:24 PM
[QUOTE=
Judicially speaking, let’s look at what’s going on currently. As we speak, a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is taking up President Trump’s 7-country travel ban. There are various possibilities. One would be to send it back to the district court. Or, they could decide in favor of the Federal government, or they could rule against. In any event, one way or another, it is likely that this case will wind up in SCOTUS.

Yet, there are currently only eight members – four liberal-leaning justices, four conservative leaning justices - on the High Court. A 4-to-4
tie would let stand whatever the 9th Circuit decides.

That’s why if appointee Gorsuch is confirmed expeditiously by the U.S. Senate, and he is sitting on the Supreme Court when this travel ban case reaches them, the outcome will be 5-to-4 “a slam-dunk”.[/QUOTE]


Here is a crazy idea. How about taking the time to actually read the law that gives the President the right to do exactly what he is trying to do. After reading the law, you will agree that the only way for a judge to block the law is to "legislate from the bench." Something the Democrats preach in defiance of the Constitution.