Started By
Message

re: Kamala Harris rising star drops a bomb

Posted on 3/24/17 at 12:17 pm to
Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
425096 posts
Posted on 3/24/17 at 12:17 pm to
quote:

I actually read her full editorial. It's the typical liberal writing: chock full of references about civil rights, gay rights, and more civil rights. Then citing two cases where she disagreed with Gorsuch.


LINK

quote:

Take the case of Alphonse Maddin, a trucker who got stuck on the road in sub-zero temperatures and abandoned his cargo to seek help. Because he left his truck, his employer fired him. Maddin sued and seven judges ruled in his favor. Only one — Judge Gorsuch — sided with the company. Luckily, Maddin won his case. But had Gorsuch prevailed, it would have been easier for some employers to fire employees without consequence. Imagine that — being fired for trying to save your life.


Gorsuch wrote a dissent that was centered around Chevron and issues of statutory interpretation. it's very likely that had he been the actual deciding vote, he wouldn't have dissented. dissents are often used as platforms for judges to discuss policy implications of bad precedents and it's almost certain this is the only reason Gorsuch dissented

quote:

In another case, a college professor named Grace Hwang was diagnosed with cancer. The university provided her a leave of absence to get treatment, but refused to extend that leave even though her doctor said she needed more time to get well. Judge Gorsuch called the university’s decision “reasonable” and rejected her lawsuit. Grace died last summer and her family recently wrote, “His decision was heartless. It removed the human element from the equation. It did not bring justice.”

and this i the problem with how most progs and many liberals view courts

the "human element" has no part in these decisions and relying on such malarkey creates very bad law

quote:

Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, the civil rights hero who argued Brown and inspired my career, once bluntly defined his judicial philosophy, saying, “You do what you think is right and let the law catch up.”


insanity
This post was edited on 3/24/17 at 12:18 pm
Posted by Errerrerrwere
Member since Aug 2015
38488 posts
Posted on 3/24/17 at 12:18 pm to


She only has a 63 attack. Gorsuch should be fine.
Posted by Dale51
Member since Oct 2016
32378 posts
Posted on 3/24/17 at 12:26 pm to
quote:

Take the case of Alphonse Maddin, a trucker who got stuck on the road in sub-zero temperatures and abandoned his cargo to seek help. Because he left his truck, his employer fired him.


I'm still not clear on this.
If he uncoupled the trailer and left, only to come back in 15 minutes after the truck warmed up, why was he freezing? If the problem was the brake lockup on the trailer...but the truck itself was functioning and able to run with a heater, why was he in danger of freezing?
This post was edited on 3/24/17 at 12:28 pm
Posted by DawgfaninCa
San Francisco, California
Member since Sep 2012
20092 posts
Posted on 3/24/17 at 1:26 pm to
quote:

the "human element" has no part in these decisions and relying on such malarkey creates very bad law


You are 100% correct.

That is why Lady Justice wears a blindfold.

Posted by DawgfaninCa
San Francisco, California
Member since Sep 2012
20092 posts
Posted on 3/24/17 at 1:26 pm to
quote:

the "human element" has no part in these decisions and relying on such malarkey creates very bad law


You are 100% correct.

That is why Lady Justice wears a blindfold.

first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram