Al Franken's grilling of Gorsuch exposes the heartless cruelty behind conservative legal philosophy
WEDNESDAY, MAR 22, 2017 12:30 PM EDT
Al Frankens grilling of Gorsuch exposes the heartless cruelty behind conservative legal philosophy
Comic turned senator rips apart Gorsuch's infamous "frozen trucker" opinion. If only other Democrats would follow
PAUL ROSENBERG
In a few short minutes of questioning Trumps Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch on Tuesday, Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., exposed the utter absurdity of an elaborate legal fiction that conservatives have spent decades constructing. That fiction is meant to place them unreachably beyond any possible question, no matter how ludicrous, cruel or unjust their rulings might be. If the Democrats had any semblance of a coherent messaging apparatus, the Gorsuch nomination would be finished. But, of course, they dont.
It happened so quickly, and Frankens manner as usual was so understated, that it was easy to miss the significance of what happened. But the nation cannot afford to let that happen. The point Franken was making was far too critical to let it pass by unnoticed. In fact, it should be a rallying point to gather around, one that could reset the course of American jurisprudence along more sound and sober lines.
Frankens questioning concerned the notorious frozen trucker case, TransAm Trucking v. Dept. of Labor. Other senators had mentioned it, but never quite in the way that Franken did. A trucker named Alphonse Maddin was fired for making a commonsense decision to save his own life and to protect others as well. Gorsuch, alone among all the judges who ruled on the case, thought that was perfectly fine. Indeed, he felt it was the only legal conclusion he could possibly reach, a conclusion Franken called absurd.
A black-robed judge in the warm comfort of his chambers decides that a trucker should have meekly accepted freezing to death (alone in his truck, in midwinter, in the middle of the night), and theres nothing anyone can do about it. That is conservative jurisprudence in a nutshell. Its reason enough to not merely reject Neil Gorsuch but also spurn any judge who would justify himself and his rulings with similar rhetoric like John Roberts before him of simply, heartlessly interpreting the law the only way he could, by calling balls and strikes.
more
http://www.salon.com/2017/03/22/al-frankens-grilling-of-gorsuch-exposes-the-heartless-cruelty-behind-conservative-legal-philosophy/
Thomas Hurt
(13,903 posts)when you think liberal policies are plots to prevent your moral inferiors from being punished for their sins.
Seems to infuriate conservatives that God has allowed it. So, they just step in to try to judge and punish themselves.
Skittles
(153,169 posts)yes INDEED
gopiscrap
(23,761 posts)babylonsister
(171,074 posts)yurbud
(39,405 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)What as ass.