February 4, 2017
I am surprised at the current lack of opposition toward Judge Gorsuch’s nomination to the US Supreme Court on jurisprudential grounds.
Irrespective of his purported brilliance and articulate writing, he will base his reasoning on textualism and originalism – deference to the legislator from a perspective of the 18th century experience of the framers of the Bill of Rights.
This approach gave the US:
– unfettered corporate spending in the electoral process (Citizens United v Federal election Commission) and
– the first movement in 200 years from the Court’s tempered approach that the purpose of the Second Amendment was not to guarantee individuals’ right to protection (District of Columbia v Heller), a huge blow to gun control
The next step will probably be to support legislative control over women’s reproductive rights – i.e. reverse Roe v Wade.
And yet there seems no appetite to challenge the appointment to counter these very unfortunate trends.
Surely “advise and consent” from the point of view of the framers, was placed in the constitution to address the prospect of judicial tyranny
Thomas Jefferson is rolling..