U.S. Constitution
See other U.S. Constitution Articles
Title: How Badly Is Neil Gorsuch Annoying the Other Supreme Court Justices?
Source:
The New Yorker
URL Source: https://www.newyorker.com/news/dail ... e-other-supreme-court-justices
Published: Oct 1, 2017
Author: Jeffrey Toobin
Post Date: 2017-10-01 14:22:52 by Tooconservative
Keywords: None
Views: 1041
Comments: 13
Why? Neither Thomas has ever addressed the issue publicly, but it’s possible to offer some informed speculation. The Justices, and especially Chief Justice John Roberts, are assiduous defenders of the Court’s reputation. As savvy denizens of Washington, D.C., they understand the political dimension of their work, but they are careful to avoid any taint of outside political activity that might raise questions about their ethics. This view is shared across the ideological spectrum at the Court, as the Justices believe, with some reason, that an attack on one of them could quickly expand into an attack on all. So did the Chief Justice suggest to Justice Thomas, in a gentle and deferential way, that perhaps his wife’s activities were reflecting poorly on the Court? And did Clarence and Ginni Thomas subsequently decide that she might dial back her outspoken role? It seems more than possible. The retreat of Ginni Thomas brings to mind the emergence of Justice Neil M. Gorsuch. Earlier this week, Gorsuch gave a speech before the Fund for American Studies, a conservative educational and advocacy group. The Justices do occasionally speak before groups with high political profiles. Most of the Justices on the conservative wing have appeared in front of the Federalist Society, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Stephen G. Breyer have addressed the American Constitution Society, the Federalists’ liberal counterpart. What made Gorsuch’s appearance especially notable was that it took place at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, which is the focus of several pending cases that may well wind up before the Supreme Court. These lawsuits allege that the Trump family’s ownership of the hotel, which is patronized by foreigners with interests before the executive branch, violates the emoluments clause of the Constitution. Gorsuch’s presence at the hotel could look like an endorsement of the propriety of its ownership arrangements. Gorsuch’s Trump Hotel speech followed one he gave at the University of Louisville, where he was introduced by Mitch McConnell, the Senate Majority Leader, who was, more than anyone, responsible for blocking Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the seat that Gorsuch now occupies. Gorsuch rewarded McConnell not only with an appearance in the senator’s home town but with a speech that underlined the Justice’s own conservative approach to the law. There is nothing unlawful about Gorsuch’s speeches, though it’s hard to say just what the ethical rules are for Supreme Court Justices. They are exempt from the code that governs the conduct of other federal judges, so the Court has traditionally relied on informal self-policing. There is a strong internal culture based on the idea that no Justice should embarrass the Court; Gorsuch’s tiptoeing up to the line of advocacy for and gratitude to conservatives might earn some advice from the Chief Justice to mind the unwritten rules. Gorsuch’s speeches might appear less distasteful to his colleagues if he had made an otherwise more graceful début on the Court. As Linda Greenhouse observed in the Times the end of Gorsuch’s first term, he managed to violate the Court’s traditions as soon as he arrived. He dominated oral arguments, when new Justices are expected to hang back. He instructed his senior colleagues, who collectively have a total of a hundred and forty years’ experience on the Court, about how to do their jobs. Dissenting from a decision that involved the interpretation of federal laws, he wrote, “If a statute needs repair, there’s a constitutionally prescribed way to do it. It’s called legislation.” Perhaps he thought that the other Justices were unfamiliar with this thing called “legislation.” Gorsuch also expressed ill-disguised contempt for Anthony Kennedy’s landmark opinion legalizing same-sex marriage in all fifty states. Earlier this year, the Court’s majority overturned an Arkansas ruling that the state could refuse to put the name of a birth mother’s same-sex spouse on their child’s birth certificate. Dissenting, Gorsuch wrote, “Nothing in Obergefell spoke (let alone clearly) to the question.” That “let alone clearly” reflected a conservative consensus that Kennedy’s opinion was a confusing mess. Perhaps Gorsuch will, as the years pass, prove to be a more clubbable colleague; or perhaps he’ll decide, at least socially, to go his own way. But what’s already clear is his ideology as a Justice. In his first fifteen cases on the Court, as the number-crunchers at FiveThirtyEight discovered, he joined Thomas, the most right-wing Justice, every time—and he even joined all of Thomas’s concurring opinions. Gorsuch’s outside activities may draw a private word from the Chief Justice, but Roberts would never presume (or want) to change Gorsuch’s votes. And the new Justice is casting those just as his sponsors had hoped and his opponents had feared. Poster Comment: Gorsuch is the second coming of Clarence Thomas. Good. He is also the tallest Justice, something I always find persuasive. I hope he annoys the libs into early retirement or a fatal heart attack. In 2009 and 2010, Virginia Thomas became an outspoken opponent of the new President, Barack Obama. Ginni Thomas, as she is known, travelled the country as a leader of the growing Tea Party movement, which was particularly focussed on overturning the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. Around the same time, legal challenges to the law were working their way to the Supreme Court, where Ginni’s husband, Clarence Thomas, serves. Media attention began to focus on the propriety of such a close association between a Justice and a public adversary of a law whose fate was before the Court. Then, shortly before the A.C.A. case came before the Justices, in 2012, something happened. Ginni Thomas stopped her public advocacy; indeed, she has virtually disappeared from public view in the past few years.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Tooconservative (#0)
Who needs a teleprompter when you've got Mitch the bitch McConnell by your side? If he's agreeing with Clarence Thomas, he must be disagreeing with Mitch a lot. That's a good thing!
Gorsuch has been everything promised and maybe a bit more. And McConnell may hang on to his post just because he held that seat open for Trump to fill with Gorsuch. No matter what, The Turtle's biggest critics have to admit that McConnell alone kept 0bama from putting another lib on the Court, with disastrous consequences in a number of cases that would be decided. In none of those cases would 0bama's nominee vote with Clarence Thomas. And Gorsuch did vote with Thomas every time. Mitch the Bitch won't be reticent to remind them of this.
I'd be extremely disappointed if I heard during a round table discussion with all 9 justices, if Ginsburg should vapor lock right next to Gorsuch, that he preformed CPR. I might apply chest compressions... if I knew her ribs would snap like twigs. I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
I'm afraid that is one drawback with Gorsuch. He is a very decent human being.
I'm afraid that is one drawback with Gorsuch. He is a very decent human being. That's a shame. Decency Is the very weakness that liberals prey upon. I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
Decency is a weakness? Man, you are still one fucked up POS. With that kind of attitude, no wonder so many cops are assholes. Evil people prey on decent people. Because some of the decent people are let's say gullible.
Yes... lots of things cause weakness. Even decency. Puffing on Ginsburg might be the decent thing to do as she turns blue... but keeping her alive weakens or decays society. Allowing a convicted rapist to live would be considered the decent thing to do by liberals... just like you. A super liberal in the USSC is just as dangerous as a non executed serial killer. Being against the death penalty IS A WEAKNESS. Someday, you might be able to critically think beyond spin propaganda OR YOUR OWN LIBERAL BELIEFS. That's what you just did... it's what liberal MSM does to indoctrinate the mindless sheep. They make the word DECENT all bold print, then spin it like you did to make the sheeple upset. Trump, said no border wall is a weakness, even though allowing dreamers to stay is the DECENT thing to do. TRUMP IS INDECENT. Shut your liberal hole. You do as liberal MSM DOES... and correct me if I'm wrong, but you worked for liberal MSM... and you made a living indoctrinating the sheeple with your liberal spin. I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
Come on Deckard isn't a liberal. He may not be everything you think a person should be but he isn't a liberal imo.
1) You just saw him spin what I said, just like liberal MSM does. Conservatives don't do that. 2) If he was honest, he'd tell you he agrees with many (not all) ANTIFA ideologies. 99% of antifa is liberal. 3) If he was honest, he'd tell you he agrees with many Black LIES Matters ideologies. 99% of them support liberals. 4) If he was honest, he'd tell you he supports most of OWS ideologies... 90% of them are liberals. 5) He supports legal drugs. That's a liberal platform staple. Hes too liberal for my liking. I'll bet he supports welfare in some form. I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
3) If he was honest, he'd tell you he agrees with many Black LIES Matters ideologies. 99% of them support liberals. 4) If he was honest, he'd tell you he supports most of OWS ideologies... 90% of them are liberals. You're a lying scumbag piece of shit. I dare you to find ONE word I have ever posted supporting any of those groups. Typical cop - lie about everything. Go fuck yourself. How could anyone... you only post cop hating articles or far fetched conspiracy articles from sites ANTIFA, BLM and OWS feed off of. When's the last time YOU POSTED A NEGATIVE ARTICLE about either of those groups? When have you ever spoke bad about BLM? lol You gonna try and tell this forum that the terrorist groups I've mentioned don't read and propagate from Free Though Project? You do know they post the SAME SHIT ARTICLES, from the same media sources, on FaceBook. I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
More lies from the retired revenue collector. Eat a buffet of dicks. Braying jackass!!
#2. To: hondo68 (#1)
#3. To: Tooconservative (#0)
I hope he annoys the libs into early retirement or a fatal heart attack
#4. To: GrandIsland (#3)
I'd be extremely disappointed if I heard during a round table discussion with all 9 justices, if Ginsburg should vapor lock right next to Gorsuch, that he preformed CPR.
#5. To: Tooconservative (#4)
#6. To: GrandIsland (#5)
Decency Is the very weakness
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.
#7. To: Deckard (#6)
#8. To: Deckard (#6)
Decency is a weakness?
#9. To: GrandIsland (#8)
#10. To: A K A Stone (#9)
(Edited)
#11. To: GrandIsland (#10)
2) If he was honest, he'd tell you he agrees with many (not all) ANTIFA ideologies. 99% of antifa is liberal.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.
#12. To: Deckard (#11)
(Edited)
I dare you to find ONE word I have ever posted supporting any of those groups.
#13. To: GrandIsland (#12)
you only post cop hating articles or far fetched conspiracy articles from sites ANTIFA, BLM and OWS feed off of.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]