"The belief that the Supreme Court is a responsible guarantor of constitutional rights and liberties is particularly rife among liberals. For decades, they have both accepted and reiterated the narrative that the Constitution is a moral document that, when appropriately interpreted by jurists, restrains the state’s power over the individual."
As seen solely through the prism of Roe v. Wade. Otherwise, this is completely **** backwards.
"The belief that the Supreme Court is a responsible guarantor of constitutional rights and liberties is particularly rife among liberals. For decades, they have both accepted and reiterated the narrative that the Constitution is a moral document that, when appropriately interpreted by jurists, restrains the state’s power over the individual."
As seen solely through the prism of Roe v. Wade. Otherwise, this is completely **** backwards.
I think if you're talking about the commerce clause, you're right. But I think if you're talking about the 4th, 5th and 6th amendments or substantive due process (i.e Roe), than its a fair reading.
But this is what I love about Jacobin: the idea that the Constitution's structure and purpose somehow amounts to false consciousness. I love that.
I wanted Willett because I think he would have taken another look at the rampant rent-seeking and burdensome regulation that goes on both with Congress and the several states. But the more I read about Gorsuch the more I like. He's what we want.
It says here that Gorsuch is a modern day Earl Warren, and will be found to be a maverick who often enrages the right. Why? Because i want it to be so.
At any rate, he is not Clarence Thomas and as far as we know has never complained about P. hairs on his coke. Trump did not go wacko and pick a crazy, good for him.
At any rate, he is not Clarence Thomas and as far as we know has never complained about P. hairs on his coke. Trump did not go wacko and pick a crazy, good for him.
yep^^^^^
Look, I will probably disagree with the majority of his rulings but he seems like a decent human being who will take his position very seriously. I don't see any reason that he should not be confirmed. Of course, Schumer and Co. have to make a good show and have him squirm for a few days at the hearings but that is all part of the theater.
COOKIE POLICY We use cookies to improve your browsing experience and help us improve our websites. For more information, please click here. By continuing to use our website, you agree to our use of such cookies.
PRIVACY POLICY Our Privacy Policy has changed. For more information, please click here. By continuing to use our website, you agree to the changes.
TERMS OF USE Our Terms of Use have changed. For more information, please click here. By continuing to use our website, you agree to the changes.
Replies
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
"What began as a fight at a strip club finds its way here as a clash over hearsay."
He was when he was confirmed to the 10th circuit, more or less unanimously. Now of course he's way too extreme.
And its not bad! There's some heft to it, even though of course I disagree. its lot more well-done than Bernie the Bolshie ranting about the banks.
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/02/trump-gorsuch-supreme-court-nomination-garland/
As seen solely through the prism of Roe v. Wade. Otherwise, this is completely **** backwards.
I think if you're talking about the commerce clause, you're right. But I think if you're talking about the 4th, 5th and 6th amendments or substantive due process (i.e Roe), than its a fair reading.
But this is what I love about Jacobin: the idea that the Constitution's structure and purpose somehow amounts to false consciousness. I love that.
Its not a "narrative." Its the whole point.
--Karl Marx, probably.
At any rate, he is not Clarence Thomas and as far as we know has never complained about P. hairs on his coke. Trump did not go wacko and pick a crazy, good for him.
OTH, DeVos is hanging on a thread. Interesting.
Brennan, Warren, Souter, O'Connor, Kennedy. . .all GOP nominees.
yep^^^^^
Look, I will probably disagree with the majority of his rulings but he seems like a decent human being who will take his position very seriously. I don't see any reason that he should not be confirmed. Of course, Schumer and Co. have to make a good show and have him squirm for a few days at the hearings but that is all part of the theater.
Lawyers and decimal points. Its a thing.:D
****, I can feel the burn all the way down here in Ogden!