View Poll Results: For Gorsuch fans, do you think he is as ideologically driven as Scalia was?

Voters
14. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    1 7.14%
  • No

    3 21.43%
  • Maybe

    2 14.29%
  • I don't know yet

    9 64.29%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 44
Thanks Tree24Thanks

Thread: Question for Gorsuch fans....

  1. #21
    told you so Amelia's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    43,109
    Thanks
    24576

    From
    Wisconsin
    Quote Originally Posted by pragmatic View Post
    Gorsuch simply ruled that what the company did was not against the letter of the law. Sort of a black/white thing.

    Wasn't all that outrageous.

    Yeah. Black and white. Excruciatingly literal.

    Seemingly without regard for the intent of the law.

  2. #22
    Flibbertigibbet Wonderer's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2014
    Posts
    22,677
    Thanks
    14327

    From
    Missouri
    Quote Originally Posted by Amelia View Post
    Yeah. Black and white. Excruciatingly literal.

    Seemingly without regard for the intent of the law.
    That's an actual (and for many jurists) preferred approach to jurisprudence. It's a conscious choice not to legislate; to leave the legislating to elected officials, and to simply interpret the laws as actually written, not as they may have been intended (or as a given judge wishes they were written). It's similar to the way contracts are construed.
    Thanks from pragmatic

  3. #23
    told you so Amelia's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    43,109
    Thanks
    24576

    From
    Wisconsin
    Quote Originally Posted by Wonderer View Post
    That's an actual (and for many jurists) preferred approach to jurisprudence. It's a conscious choice not to legislate; to leave the legislating to elected officials, and to simply interpret the laws as actually written, not as they may have been intended (or as a given judge wishes they were written). It's similar to the way contracts are construed.
    Like the Oklahoma ruling which said oral sex without invitation isn't illegal if the victim is unconscious?

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/...lcohol-consent

  4. #24
    Flibbertigibbet Wonderer's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2014
    Posts
    22,677
    Thanks
    14327

    From
    Missouri
    Quote Originally Posted by Amelia View Post
    Like the Oklahoma ruling which said oral sex without invitation isn't illegal if the victim is unconscious?

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/...lcohol-consent
    Yes - that would be an example. As noted in the article:

    Michelle Anderson, the dean of the CUNY School of Law who has written extensively about rape law, called the ruling “appropriate” but the law “archaic”.

    “This is a call for the legislature to change the statute, which is entirely out of step with what other states have done in this area and what Oklahoma should do,” she said. “It creates a huge loophole for sexual abuse that makes no sense.”

  5. #25
    the "good" prag pragmatic's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    27,686
    Thanks
    16679

    From
    between Moon and NYC
    Quote Originally Posted by Amelia View Post
    Like the Oklahoma ruling which said oral sex without invitation isn't illegal if the victim is unconscious?

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/...lcohol-consent

    The Appellate Court decision was unanimous. And as noted in the article. Several noted scholars concurred. The problem was with the poorly written law. Not the Judges.


    "But several legal experts declined to fault the appeals court, saying instead that the ruling should be a wake-up call for legislators to update Oklahoma’s laws.

    Michelle Anderson, the dean of the CUNY School of Law who has written extensively about rape law, called the ruling “appropriate” but the law “archaic”.

    “This is a call for the legislature to change the statute, which is entirely out of step with what other states have done in this area and what Oklahoma should do,” she said. “It creates a huge loophole for sexual abuse that makes no sense.”
    Thanks from Wonderer

  6. #26
    told you so Amelia's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    43,109
    Thanks
    24576

    From
    Wisconsin
    Forcible sodomy is against the law ... except when it isn't because ... why again was that?



    Yeah, this is the kind of judge Gorsuch is, and I'm not likely to be happy about that.

  7. #27
    told you so Amelia's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    43,109
    Thanks
    24576

    From
    Wisconsin
    But it is what it is.

    Democrats gave the White House to Trump, and he could have done worse than Gorsuch. So while I'm not happy, we can count ourselves lucky that he didn't do worse.

  8. #28
    Flibbertigibbet Wonderer's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2014
    Posts
    22,677
    Thanks
    14327

    From
    Missouri
    Quote Originally Posted by Amelia View Post
    Forcible sodomy is against the law ... except when it isn't because ... why again was that?



    Yeah, this is the kind of judge Gorsuch is, and I'm not likely to be happy about that.
    When you're talking about written law (which this case was) as opposed to moral law, the language of the law is what governs. And if it is poorly written, which it appears to be in this instance, it's on the legislature to rewrite it - not the courts. I absolutely understand how galling that is, particularly in a situation like this, but that is the proper function of the two branches.
    Thanks from pragmatic

  9. #29
    the "good" prag pragmatic's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    27,686
    Thanks
    16679

    From
    between Moon and NYC
    Quote Originally Posted by Wonderer View Post
    When you're talking about written law (which this case was) as opposed to moral law, the language of the law is what governs. And if it is poorly written, which it appears to be in this instance, it's on the legislature to rewrite it - not the courts. I absolutely understand how galling that is, particularly in a situation like this, but that is the proper function of the two branches.

    Well stated.
    Thanks from Wonderer

  10. #30
    told you so Amelia's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    43,109
    Thanks
    24576

    From
    Wisconsin
    Quote Originally Posted by Wonderer View Post
    When you're talking about written law (which this case was) as opposed to moral law, the language of the law is what governs. And if it is poorly written, which it appears to be in this instance, it's on the legislature to rewrite it - not the courts. I absolutely understand how galling that is, particularly in a situation like this, but that is the proper function of the two branches.

    How was his thoroughly rebuffed education decision the right one?

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. While Gorsuch
    By MaryAnne in forum Current Events
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 23rd March 2017, 06:10 AM
  2. Gorsuch on abortion
    By RNG in forum Current Events
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 21st March 2017, 07:19 PM
  3. Gorsuch
    By Miller47 in forum Current Events
    Replies: 116
    Last Post: 4th February 2017, 06:29 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed