Mister CIA
Footballguy
I don't have anything interesting to say, but it occurred to me that if Colin Kaepernick is worthy of two threads in the FFA, then surely the guy replacing Antonin Scalia deserves one.
Honestly, I'm not terribly well-informed on how things are going with Gorsuch's nomination and whether there are any legitimate concerns regarding his confirmation, but getting reversed in an 8-0 decision by the Supreme Court while you are sitting in your confirmation hearing can't be a good development. Not to mention the fact that Gorsuch's decision, in addition to apparently being wrong on the law, was wrong at the expense of a child with autism. Ouch.Washington Post @washingtonpost
Democrats plan to filibuster nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to Supreme Court wapo.st/2nb8Oo1
--
I said this before, but I think this is the wrong move. I know the Repubs acted reprehensibly and stole a S.Ct. nomination. But someone has to be the adults. Someone has to care about this country and stop putting party over country.
Dems should have a vote on Gorsuch and not filibuster.
And that may be a very legit reason to vote no on Gorsuch. I guess my point is, I wish they would actually go to the vote. And not filibuster. To which the Repubs are going to destroy the filibuster.Honestly, I'm not terribly well-informed on how things are going with Gorsuch's nomination and whether there are any legitimate concerns regarding his confirmation, but getting reversed in an 8-0 decision by the Supreme Court while you are sitting in your confirmation hearing can't be a good development. Not to mention the fact that Gorsuch's decision, in addition to apparently being wrong on the law, was wrong at the expense of a child with autism. Ouch.
I say this in every one of these threads but there's no going back unless we get a constitutional amendment ending lifetime Supreme Court appointments. There's just too much at stake right now to play nice.And that may be a very legit reason to vote no on Gorsuch. I guess my point is, I wish they would actually go to the vote. And not filibuster. To which the Repubs are going to destroy the filibuster.
I just wish they would go back to civil, healthy disagreement between the two parties. I think that starts with acting civilly. Not using the filibuster option.
Maybe I'm wrong or naive.
Only in back alleys behind sports stadiums.Is it true he wants the National Anthem played before each abortion?
It wasn't his decision. It was a decision citing one of his decisions which was in turn relying on a prior 10th Circuit decision (which wasn't his). And that's the best the Dems have come up with despite Gorsuch's participation in nearly 3000 cases. They haven't come close to demonstrating a good faith argument against confirmation that is based on Gorsuch's record.Honestly, I'm not terribly well-informed on how things are going with Gorsuch's nomination and whether there are any legitimate concerns regarding his confirmation, but getting reversed in an 8-0 decision by the Supreme Court while you are sitting in your confirmation hearing can't be a good development. Not to mention the fact that Gorsuch's decision, in addition to apparently being wrong on the law, was wrong at the expense of a child with autism. Ouch.
https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/07/07-1304.pdfIt wasn't his decision.
As I understand it, his decision was the one that established the incorrect "merely" standard. That's where the screw up occurred. He misread the prior 10th Circuit decision and thus inappropriately lowered the standard.It wasn't his decision. It was a decision citing one of his decisions which was in turn relying on a prior 10th Circuit decision (which wasn't his). And that's the best the Dems have come up with despite Gorsuch's participation in nearly 3000 cases. They haven't come close to demonstrating a good faith argument against confirmation that is based on Gorsuch's record.
I imagine he'll get hazed by his new colleagues over it. For sure they're gonna give him a hard time (good naturedly).It's a news headline but nothing more.
Gorsuch will be our next SC justice and, quite frankly, he's one of the better choices (if not the best) for a position the current administration has put in place.
I agree, but when the party doubles down on establishment types after Hillary lost to freakin' Trump, I expect nothing less. The face of the party is Pelosi, Schumer, and Perez for Christ sake!whoknew said:Washington Post @washingtonpost
Democrats plan to filibuster nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to Supreme Court wapo.st/2nb8Oo1
--
I said this before, but I think this is the wrong move. I know the Repubs acted reprehensibly and stole a S.Ct. nomination. But someone has to be the adults. Someone has to care about this country and stop putting party over country.
Dems should have a vote on Gorsuch and not filibuster.
And we don't disagree on the importance. I posted this one Supreme Court thread, but assuming the Martin-Quinn scores accurately represents a good measure of liberal-conservative leanings, had Garland been anyway near as liberal as the other four liberals, it would have been the most liberal leaning court in any of our lifetimes.fatguyinalittlecoat said:I say this in every one of these threads but there's no going back unless we get a constitutional amendment ending lifetime Supreme Court appointments. There's just too much at stake right now to play nice.