Neal Gorsuch Senate Confirmation hearing day III

>nu/pol/
>No SCOTUS hearing thread

You guys should be ashamed.

Livestream: youtube.com/watch?v=kWVyrrRsh4U

All things Gorsuch related go here. Yesterday's thread was comfy af.

Bump

Is there any possibility that (((Schumer)))'s jewish tricks work and the vote is postponed?

postponed until when?

How would he postpone the vote when he is the minority party?

Someone explain to a non-burger. What's the big deal with saying if he (dis)agrees with past rulings?

WE ARE COVERING 3 DIFFERENT HAPPENINGS CHILL THE FUCK OUT! WE WILL GET TO IT!

...

They are busy making fat videogame man and race baiting slide threads. Shamefur dispray.

SCOTUS interprets the constitution, so when SCOTUS rules on something that means that the US Constitution permits or prohibits whatever is being argued.

As you know the US Constitution is the supreme document of law here, which means that there are only 2 ways to change a SCOTUS ruling, and that is to amend the constitution (which is extremely hard and requires almost universal public support) or have another SCOTUS ruling that nullifies the first.

For instance, Brown v Board says that integration must happen, if it is stricken down that de facto legalizes Jim Crow laws.

Not to mention that to secure POTUS against political leverage they cannot be deposed by any normal means, it has to be extreme extenuating circumstances like being senile and they have to prove it.

There are many, many laws in the US that exist and many freedoms that are protected because of SCOTUS rulings.

Gorsuch is destroying these fuckers
And fuck, hirono is going to go at it again? You dumb bitch, youre making people from hawaii, especially Japanese people look like fools

>Mike Crapo
Is this real?

SCOTUS is the highest court, and among other things they interpret our highest laws.

In practice, the court has become openly political. They can overrule their previous case law to change the meaning of the Constitution. Overruling Roe V Wade, for example, could allow states to ban abortion.

The system is broken, obviously, but it's the one we have.

A judge shouldn't agree or disagree with a ruling. They should only interpret the facts and apply a ruling. It's all logic, no feelings.

Poor guy has to live with being Merrick Garland's cuck.

Thanks. I understand SCOTUS is in practice a legislative body sometimes. Common law is weird.

I've been watching for a total of ~4 hours today and yesterday and much of that time was Democrats trying to bait him into taking a stance. Just now they spent 20 minutes going

>Do you agree with the Brown v Board ruling?
>It's a shining moment in court history bla bla
>But do you agree with it?
>My personal beliefs have nothing to do with my work
>But Justice so and so said he agreed with it. Why won't you?
>It is precedent. It doesn't matter what I think

They spend many hours going back and forth like this.

You have it backwards m8

Wow this woman talking now is a total cunt, pretty much just insulted him to his face because she's butthurt over Garland.
Gorsuch had to educate her that it's the legislature's job to make laws, not the courts'.

I didn't vote for this bitch, but shes a career politician here and people tend to vote by name recognition here, not actual policy.

>Well senator I think that making laws is something that this body is better at than a court
>LOL THANK YOU FOR ACKNOWLEDGING THAT JUDGES SUCK I ALSO THINK JUDGES SUCK LOLOLOL
>ALSO MUH POPULAR VOTE

Hawaiians, defend yourselves.

Holy fuck this gook Hawaiian Senator. The restraint Gorsuch is showing is impressive.

there isn't really.

It's boring as fuck just a bunch of senators rambling and the candidate saying no comment.

What are you talking about? It's extremely important. A judge should never input their personal feelings into a ruling, only to carry out the law

McConnell was the cucker, Garland the cuckee, and Gorsuch the cuckoo chick.

>Hawaiians, defend yourselves.
They can't, that's why continental Americans have to do it for them. Without us, they'd be a Japanese colony right now.

That has nothing to do with the question. (Also it's wishful thinking).

I was planning on concentrating on that, but so many happenings today, it's hard

>senator drinking Mountain Dew

Very much actually. If he projects influence of his personal beliefs during his confirmation hearing he'll never be confirmed.
I kek'd

>Very much actually. If he projects influence of his personal beliefs during his confirmation hearing he'll never be confirmed.
Bullshit he's nominated exactly because he's a conservative, it's a bullshit practise that has come into play because candidates got scared of answering questions after Bork was rejected.

Never give your opinion as a judge, because you're job is to give facts, and only deal in facts. Denmark courts must be fucked if judges just rule according to their own personal beliefs.

Because activist judges fucked a lot of shit up and they use "Stare Decisis" as a meme to justify that shit can't be overturned because the Court's now more to the right.

>Never give your opinion as a judge, because you're job is to give facts, and only deal in facts.
You know nothing of law especially not your own law. US law is highly opinionated, try reading some opinions.

...

> after Bork was rejected.
That's precisely why it's a big deal. It would also be grounds for recusal if those cases were to come before SCOTUS again.

Can you list me some cases based on opinion? The only issues ever come about when you interpret federal from state law. And even then it's not opinions, it's different interpretations of various statutes and precedents

holy shit this has been a complete waste of time, Congress is the worst

No they wouldn't at all in anyway. That's not how it works at all, having an opinion on a legal issue is everyday work for any jurist, if that was grounds for recusal all justices would have to be recused in every case ever.

He's talking about activist judges that lead to all kinds of shitty decisions, like Griswold v. Connecticut.

No

What's wrong with that case?

opened the door for roe

I thought they were moving to a vote at 4:50? First recess and another round of questionings?