Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   Neil Gorsuch has become SCOTUS' most unpredictable member   (slate.com) divider line
    More: Interesting, Supreme Court of the United States, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Roe v. Wade, John G. Roberts, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, irritating justice, Antonin Scalia  
•       •       •

1658 clicks; posted to Politics » on 15 Jul 2020 at 9:25 PM (14 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



37 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2020-07-15 2:26:43 PM  
Last time my member was unpredictable was high school.
 
2020-07-15 8:46:07 PM  
Congrats asswipes

Behold your creation,
 
2020-07-15 9:27:29 PM  
The next David Souter?  You RWNJs sold your souls for nothing, and the Devil's bill comes due on 11-3.  How schadenfreudalicious!
 
2020-07-15 9:28:42 PM  
Viagra's a helluva drug. Just sayin'.
 
2020-07-15 9:29:53 PM  
Perhaps he's aware he'll be under investigation again if Trump loses. Either he's trying to look moderate, or he had a come to Jesus moment.
 
2020-07-15 9:30:11 PM  
His vote and argument on McGirt v Oklahoma surprised the hell out of me.
 
2020-07-15 9:31:04 PM  
I'm not that shocked.  The Republicans make solid political bank on the abortion issue.  If it goes away, it's a 'win' and everything is good in the Republican mindset and they don't turn out in droves.  It's in the interest of the Republican Party to ultimately choose people who keep it a valid issue so stupid Republican voters (aka 'normal' Republican voters) keep handwringing and turning out and voting against their own best interests.  The people who cheer the hardest after liberals for a left-leaning Supreme Court are the Republicans in power because that means the donations will not stop coming in.

And Republican voters, having shiat for brains, never figure it out.
 
2020-07-15 9:32:27 PM  
Gorsuch may seem like a fair and wise law talkin' man right now.

Come see me after he has a developed pattern in abortion related cases.
 
2020-07-15 9:34:12 PM  
slate is such garbage. "ih, this guy is the biggest asshole on the planet and will ruin the supreme court! but wait! he's biting the hand that feeds! hes an asshole to them!"

shiate. farking shiate
 
2020-07-15 9:34:55 PM  

Clark W Griswald: Perhaps he's aware he'll be under investigation again if Trump loses. Either he's trying to look moderate, or he had a come to Jesus moment.


Or, he's a primary exhibit on why we should not have all of our Justices spend their entire pre-Court years practice corporate law on the East Coast.

We need to double the size of the court and excuse Harvard and Yale grads from the expansion.
 
2020-07-15 9:37:18 PM  
media0.giphy.comView Full Size
 
2020-07-15 9:37:37 PM  
Haha.jpg
 
2020-07-15 9:39:39 PM  

Bob Dolemite: slate is such garbage. "ih, this guy is the biggest asshole on the planet and will ruin the supreme court! but wait! he's biting the hand that feeds! hes an asshole to them!"

shiate. farking shiate


Of all Slate's flaws, SCOTUS coverage has never been one. Both Mark Joseph Stern and Dahlia Lithwick are consistently worth reading.
 
2020-07-15 9:42:15 PM  
Perhaps a sane intern wrote down the nomination in crayon using Trump's hand while nimrod was in the middle of a mid-morning KFC nap? It's 2020.
 
2020-07-15 9:47:38 PM  

Name_Omitted: Clark W Griswald: Perhaps he's aware he'll be under investigation again if Trump loses. Either he's trying to look moderate, or he had a come to Jesus moment.

Or, he's a primary exhibit on why we should not have all of our Justices spend their entire pre-Court years practice corporate law on the East Coast.

We need to double the size of the court and excuse Harvard and Yale grads from the expansion.


Elizabeth Warren replacing RBG would fix the Yale/Harvard problem (although RBG finished at Columbia).

/Go Scarlet Knights
//your sports programs are terrible
///three for Liz
 
2020-07-15 9:50:51 PM  
Remember when we threw away the SCOTUS filibuster in a futile gesture because he was the most conservative conservative who ever conserved a tive?
 
2020-07-15 9:54:53 PM  

Clark W Griswald: Perhaps he's aware he'll be under investigation again if Trump loses.


For what?

Either he's trying to look moderate, or he had a come to Jesus moment.

Or maybe members of SCOTUS don't always match the strawmen we build to fit in neat little boxes?
 
2020-07-15 10:00:14 PM  
"you're a madman Groucho, a loose cannon. I'm warning you, one more slipup and I'll have your robes! From now on you and Brett are partners, he's going to keep an eye on you. I don't want to hear another word from the federalist society about you getting smart and following the constitution trying to crack the cases. You know what we want."

-mcconnel

"That's where you're wrong old man Mitch. These robes? I'm keeping them... You can call your lap dog off too, Groucho rides... Alone..."

-groucho

Cue heavy rock music and title credits

Neil gorsuch is "Groucho" in:

LETHAL JURISPREJUDICE
TEXTUAL APPEAL
 
2020-07-15 10:38:30 PM  
I haven't seen a decision out of him yet that wasn't consistent with his prior decisions. Just because he votes the right way on a couple civil rights cases doesn't outweigh the fact that there isn't a corporate cock he hasn't sucked.
 
2020-07-15 10:40:20 PM  

The Madd Mann: I haven't seen a decision out of him yet that wasn't consistent with his prior decisions. Just because he votes the right way on a couple civil rights cases doesn't outweigh the fact that there isn't a corporate cock he hasn't sucked.


At least he's gotten consent for that.
 
2020-07-15 10:52:08 PM  

Guntram Shatterhand: I'm not that shocked.  The Republicans make solid political bank on the abortion issue.  If it goes away, it's a 'win' and everything is good in the Republican mindset and they don't turn out in droves.  It's in the interest of the Republican Party to ultimately choose people who keep it a valid issue so stupid Republican voters (aka 'normal' Republican voters) keep handwringing and turning out and voting against their own best interests.  The people who cheer the hardest after liberals for a left-leaning Supreme Court are the Republicans in power because that means the donations will not stop coming in.

And Republican voters, having shiat for brains, never figure it out.


Abortion is the GOPs single greatest fund raiser and vote buyer. If Democrats lost their minds tomorrow and said fark it let's make it illegal, then republicans would be broke and have no farking clue how to even begin to build a base that consisted of more than racist.

I fully support a women's right to choose, but even I sometimes wonder how much good we could accomplish if we forfeited abortion rights in order to break the religious right off their stupidity  binge. I'd never actually try it because I'm sure they'd find some other idiotic issue to push like outlawing any religion but Jesus based religions but it honestly down make me wonder what you could accomplish while republicans were slinging shiat at the wall until they found something that stuck again.
 
2020-07-15 10:52:29 PM  

BMFPitt: Clark W Griswald: Perhaps he's aware he'll be under investigation again if Trump loses.

For what?

Either he's trying to look moderate, or he had a come to Jesus moment.

Or maybe members of SCOTUS don't always match the strawmen we build to fit in neat little boxes?


Or maybe he came to the realization that he doesn't have to toe the party line. He can't be fired or replaced, so we might be seeing a wiser Gorsuch.
 
2020-07-15 10:53:03 PM  

BMFPitt: Clark W Griswald: Perhaps he's aware he'll be under investigation again if Trump loses.

For what?

Either he's trying to look moderate, or he had a come to Jesus moment.

Or maybe members of SCOTUS don't always match the strawmen we build to fit in neat little boxes?


Ehh...most do though. Alito, Thomas & Kavanaugh will always place their judgment to the right. RBG, Kagan & Sotomayor, Breyer & Kagan will always go left. Of the nine, you already know which way seven are going.
 
2020-07-15 10:57:31 PM  

Name_Omitted: Clark W Griswald: Perhaps he's aware he'll be under investigation again if Trump loses. Either he's trying to look moderate, or he had a come to Jesus moment.

Or, he's a primary exhibit on why we should not have all of our Justices spend their entire pre-Court years practice corporate law on the East Coast.

We need to double the size of the court and excuse Harvard and Yale grads from the expansion.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-07-15 10:59:53 PM  
Those who are surprised by Gorsuch's rulings haven't been paying attention.
 
2020-07-15 11:13:02 PM  
Just like with anything else, you get one year to be an asshole. After that, you'd better get your shiat together. It sounds as though he's found his footing.
 
2020-07-15 11:26:01 PM  

Mr. Breeze: Or maybe he came to the realization that he doesn't have to toe the party line. He can't be fired or replaced, so we might be seeing a wiser Gorsuch.


Wiser as compared to what?  The fact that he isn't the boogeyman you imagined doesn't mean anything has actually changed.
 
2020-07-15 11:31:01 PM  

Straight Outta Wells Branch: Ehh...most do though. Alito, Thomas & Kavanaugh will always place their judgment to the right. RBG, Kagan & Sotomayor, Breyer & Kagan will always go left. Of the nine, you already know which way seven are going.


A vanishingly small number of cases have an articulable "right" or "left".
 
2020-07-15 11:31:41 PM  

andrewagill: Those who are surprised by Gorsuch's rulings haven't been paying attention.


So pretty much the whole Politics tab.
 
2020-07-15 11:37:16 PM  

BMFPitt: Straight Outta Wells Branch: Ehh...most do though. Alito, Thomas & Kavanaugh will always place their judgment to the right. RBG, Kagan & Sotomayor, Breyer & Kagan will always go left. Of the nine, you already know which way seven are going.

A vanishingly small number of cases have an articulable "right" or "left".


If that's the case, then why are we surprised by Gorsuch's rulings? And if that's the case, then why are the liberal & conservative judges typically in the same voting pack?
 
2020-07-15 11:43:55 PM  

Straight Outta Wells Branch: If that's the case, then why are we surprised by Gorsuch's rulings?


Who is "we"?

And if that's the case, then why are the liberal & conservative judges typically in the same voting pack?

Because of the very small number of cases that get media attention.  Most decisions are unanimous.
 
2020-07-15 11:46:29 PM  

BMFPitt: Straight Outta Wells Branch: If that's the case, then why are we surprised by Gorsuch's rulings?

Who is "we"?

And if that's the case, then why are the liberal & conservative judges typically in the same voting pack?

Because of the very small number of cases that get media attention.  Most decisions are unanimous.


I'll concede the second part of unanimous decisions, but let's not be disingenuous here. There's no thread about Gorsuch if he falls in line with the more conservative judges. Everyone would go about as business as usual.
 
2020-07-16 12:10:39 AM  

keldaria: Guntram Shatterhand: I'm not that shocked.  The Republicans make solid political bank on the abortion issue.  If it goes away, it's a 'win' and everything is good in the Republican mindset and they don't turn out in droves.  It's in the interest of the Republican Party to ultimately choose people who keep it a valid issue so stupid Republican voters (aka 'normal' Republican voters) keep handwringing and turning out and voting against their own best interests.  The people who cheer the hardest after liberals for a left-leaning Supreme Court are the Republicans in power because that means the donations will not stop coming in.

And Republican voters, having shiat for brains, never figure it out.

Abortion is the GOPs single greatest fund raiser and vote buyer. If Democrats lost their minds tomorrow and said fark it let's make it illegal, then republicans would be broke and have no farking clue how to even begin to build a base that consisted of more than racist.

I fully support a women's right to choose, but even I sometimes wonder how much good we could accomplish if we forfeited abortion rights in order to break the religious right off their stupidity  binge. I'd never actually try it because I'm sure they'd find some other idiotic issue to push like outlawing any religion but Jesus based religions but it honestly down make me wonder what you could accomplish while republicans were slinging shiat at the wall until they found something that stuck again.


Same thing happened in the 60s and 70s, and abortion was the wedge issue that replaced segregation when the conservatives lost that battle.

Evangelicals didn't care about abortion until then.  It was a Catholic issue.  But once the religious nuts couldn't be as openly racist in public anymore, they adopted the new issue and pretended like it was the most important thing ever.

If we forfeit the fight, women will lose their freedom and health, and the right wingers will just find something else to bleat about.
 
2020-07-16 12:39:03 AM  

Straight Outta Wells Branch: I'll concede the second part of unanimous decisions, but let's not be disingenuous here. There's no thread about Gorsuch if he falls in line with the more conservative judges. Everyone would go about as business as usual.


Gorsuch's ideology is pretty clear, and it's not a party line ideology like Thomas or Alito. He's a textualist(he claims he's an originalist, but his philosophy isn't strict, it's spiritual, which puts him more in the textualist camp).  He's predictable enough when you evaluate him on his judicial philosophy.
 
2020-07-16 1:10:36 AM  

bhcompy: Straight Outta Wells Branch: I'll concede the second part of unanimous decisions, but let's not be disingenuous here. There's no thread about Gorsuch if he falls in line with the more conservative judges. Everyone would go about as business as usual.

Gorsuch's ideology is pretty clear, and it's not a party line ideology like Thomas or Alito. He's a textualist(he claims he's an originalist, but his philosophy isn't strict, it's spiritual, which puts him more in the textualist camp).  He's predictable enough when you evaluate him on his judicial philosophy.


This. There are a lot of elements of his philosophy that I disagree with, but I can live with that. It's an honest-to-goodness disagreement over how constitutional law is to be applied, rather than utter political hackery or fundamentalist religious nonsense.
 
2020-07-16 7:41:50 AM  

kbronsito: The Madd Mann: I haven't seen a decision out of him yet that wasn't consistent with his prior decisions. Just because he votes the right way on a couple civil rights cases doesn't outweigh the fact that there isn't a corporate cock he hasn't sucked.

At least he's gotten consent for that.


HI-YOOOO!
 
2020-07-16 11:03:55 AM  

Straight Outta Wells Branch: I'll concede the second part of unanimous decisions, but let's not be disingenuous here. There's no thread about Gorsuch if he falls in line with the more conservative judges. Everyone would go about as business as usual.


As already noted above, strict textualism often correlates with the "conservative" side, and people are often shocked when he rules the way he always does but it doesn't line up with this correlation.

See also: everyone with a dual GED in law and psychology being constantly amazed that Roberts is not Thomas.
 
Displayed 37 of 37 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.