Trump's SCOTUS pick (Read 12304 times)

RSN172

Trump's SCOTUS pick
« on: January 30, 2017, 06:20:38 PM »
Will be announced at 8PM (Eastern) Tuesday.  People in the know expect it to be Gorsuch, Pryor or Hardiman.  Any one of three would be good, but Hardiman is extremely pro 2a.  Dems have threatened a filibuster "no matter who he choses."  That is a stupid statement. 
Happily living in Puna

punaperson

Re: Trump's SCOTUS pick
« Reply #1 on: January 30, 2017, 08:22:07 PM »
Will be announced at 8PM (Eastern) Tuesday.  People in the know expect it to be Gorsuch, Pryor or Hardiman.  Any one of three would be good, but Hardiman is extremely pro 2a.  Dems have threatened a filibuster "no matter who he choses."  That is a stupid statement.
It's extremely highly unlikely that a temper tantrum will produce anything but stupid. And they're gonna be having a long long long temper tantrum.

kekoa

Re: Trump's SCOTUS pick
« Reply #2 on: January 31, 2017, 04:49:55 AM »
It's extremely highly unlikely that a temper tantrum will produce anything but stupid. And they're gonna be having a long long long temper tantrum.

https://www.youtube.com/v/bNIshK5zdik?autoplay=1&start=52&end=72&controls=1&version=3

omnigun

Re: Trump's SCOTUS pick
« Reply #3 on: January 31, 2017, 10:20:30 AM »
Really hope its Hardiman just did a brief readup on him he looks good for 2a.

RSN172

Re: Trump's SCOTUS pick
« Reply #4 on: January 31, 2017, 10:43:03 AM »
I hope its Hardiman too.  I will be watching the news around 2PM HST.  I'm retired so I can do things like that. Sit around and watch the news.
Happily living in Puna

PalisadesKid

Re: Trump's SCOTUS pick
« Reply #5 on: January 31, 2017, 11:07:35 AM »
Neil Gorsuch now expected as the pick.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2017/01/31/sources-trump-will-select-judge-neil-gorsuch-for-scotus-n2279322

An article from American Thinker has some concerns for Gorsuch:

"On the other hand, there is reason for pause with Judge Gorsuch's record.  Judge Gorsuch joined in one opinion, United States v. Rodriguez, 739 F.3d 481 (11th Cir. 2013), which causes us to have some concern about his understanding of the relationship between the government and an armed citizenry.  To be fair, Judge Gorsuch did not write the Rodriguez opinion – his colleague, Judge Bobby Baldock, was the author.  Nevertheless, Judge Gorsuch joined the opinion.  He could have filed a principled dissenting opinion, or even a concurring opinion agreeing only in the judgment. The facts of the case are these.  A New Mexico policeman observed Mr. Rodriguez, a convenience store clerk, carrying a concealed handgun.  Carrying a concealed loaded handgun is illegal in New Mexico without a permit but legal if one has a license to do so.  The officer, upon seeing a Rodriguez's handgun, detained him, then – acting first and asking questions later – forcibly disarmed Rodriguez.  After finding out that Rodriguez did not, in fact, have a license to carry and, indeed, was a convicted felon, the officer placed him under arrest."



Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/01/judge_neil_gorsuch_some_cause_for_concern.html#ixzz4XNN6j9s2
« Last Edit: January 31, 2017, 11:13:56 AM by PalisadesKid »

omnigun

Re: Trump's SCOTUS pick
« Reply #6 on: January 31, 2017, 02:25:30 PM »
Yeah it appears Neil Gorsuch is the pick.   Disappointed.  But I guess its better than anything hillary would pick.

omnigun

Re: Trump's SCOTUS pick
« Reply #7 on: January 31, 2017, 03:05:21 PM »
And its official Neil Gorsuch is it.

RSN172

Re: Trump's SCOTUS pick
« Reply #8 on: January 31, 2017, 03:06:59 PM »
Now if that old hag Ginsberg would retire, he can pick Hardiman next.
Happily living in Puna

passivekinetic

Re: Trump's SCOTUS pick
« Reply #9 on: January 31, 2017, 03:15:55 PM »
Was exactly going to post what you posted.

Presumed dangerous if carrying.

Neil Gorsuch now expected as the pick.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2017/01/31/sources-trump-will-select-judge-neil-gorsuch-for-scotus-n2279322

An article from American Thinker has some concerns for Gorsuch:

"On the other hand, there is reason for pause with Judge Gorsuch's record.  Judge Gorsuch joined in one opinion, United States v. Rodriguez, 739 F.3d 481 (11th Cir. 2013), which causes us to have some concern about his understanding of the relationship between the government and an armed citizenry.  To be fair, Judge Gorsuch did not write the Rodriguez opinion – his colleague, Judge Bobby Baldock, was the author.  Nevertheless, Judge Gorsuch joined the opinion.  He could have filed a principled dissenting opinion, or even a concurring opinion agreeing only in the judgment. The facts of the case are these.  A New Mexico policeman observed Mr. Rodriguez, a convenience store clerk, carrying a concealed handgun.  Carrying a concealed loaded handgun is illegal in New Mexico without a permit but legal if one has a license to do so.  The officer, upon seeing a Rodriguez's handgun, detained him, then – acting first and asking questions later – forcibly disarmed Rodriguez.  After finding out that Rodriguez did not, in fact, have a license to carry and, indeed, was a convicted felon, the officer placed him under arrest."



Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/01/judge_neil_gorsuch_some_cause_for_concern.html#ixzz4XNN6j9s2
"The sheep fear sheepdogs, because they fail to see the wolves."
- Anonymous

omnigun

passivekinetic

Re: Trump's SCOTUS pick
« Reply #11 on: January 31, 2017, 03:19:49 PM »
Check out Wikipedia. Slathering on the liberal bias immediately...
"The sheep fear sheepdogs, because they fail to see the wolves."
- Anonymous

RSN172

Re: Trump's SCOTUS pick
« Reply #12 on: January 31, 2017, 03:28:44 PM »
I see nothing wrong with Gorsuch opinion in the Rodriguez case.  Rodriguez did not have a concealed carry permit and he was a convicted felon. 
Happily living in Puna

London808

Re: Trump's SCOTUS pick
« Reply #13 on: January 31, 2017, 03:41:40 PM »
I see nothing wrong with Gorsuch opinion in the Rodriguez case.  Rodriguez did not have a concealed carry permit and he was a convicted felon.

The problem come at this, The police officer did not know he was a felon or a CCW holder BEFORE detaining and disarming him. The evidence came onlt after he was detained and searched for the sole reason of carrying a firearm.
"Mr. Roberts is a bit of a fanatic, he has previously sued HPD about gun registration issues." : Major Richard Robinson 2016

passivekinetic

Re: Trump's SCOTUS pick
« Reply #14 on: January 31, 2017, 03:48:44 PM »
However, let's put things in perspective.

Imagine... if Hillary... had nominated to the SCOTUS...

Obama.
"The sheep fear sheepdogs, because they fail to see the wolves."
- Anonymous

PalisadesKid

Re: Trump's SCOTUS pick
« Reply #15 on: January 31, 2017, 03:53:02 PM »
The problem come at this, The police officer did not know he was a felon or a CCW holder BEFORE detaining and disarming him. The evidence came onlt after he was detained and searched for the sole reason of carrying a firearm.

Yup. The officer "lucked" out in that case.

PalisadesKid

Re: Trump's SCOTUS pick
« Reply #16 on: January 31, 2017, 03:54:14 PM »
However, let's put things in perspective.

Imagine... if Hillary... had nominated to the SCOTUS...

Obama.

That is eternally true. Things can always be worse, but there are varying degrees in which gun owners across the country will tolerate in terms of what is "ideal" as a SCOTUS Justice.

PalisadesKid

Re: Trump's SCOTUS pick
« Reply #17 on: January 31, 2017, 03:55:16 PM »
"Gorsuch is a Nazi" in 3......2...... (ok CNN, take it from here...)

Flapp_Jackson

Re: Trump's SCOTUS pick
« Reply #18 on: January 31, 2017, 04:04:43 PM »
The problem come at this, The police officer did not know he was a felon or a CCW holder BEFORE detaining and disarming him. The evidence came onlt after he was detained and searched for the sole reason of carrying a firearm.

There are a few facts missing in the posts here:

There was a 911 call from a convenience store customer reporting 2 men handling and showing each other pistols at the counter.  They were not pointing them at people, but they were not concealed.

Officers were dispatched to investigate "suspicious activity".

When they arrived, they observed Rodriguez stocking shelves.  When he bent to pick up product, the Cops observed a .357 tucked in the rear of his waistband. 

They asked him to exit the store with his hands in plain sight, to give them less confined space to talk to him.

Rodriguez walked out ahead of the Cops after becoming defensive.  As they walked through the door, one officer reached forward and removed the .357 to secure the weapon and ensure everyone's safety.

The court ruled this was a valid, Constitutional Terry Stop in association with a report of suspicious activity.  Rodriguez fit the description of one of the two reported by the 911 caller.

https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-rodriguez-189?page=1295
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world;
the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.
Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
-- George Bernard Shaw

RSN172

Re: Trump's SCOTUS pick
« Reply #19 on: January 31, 2017, 04:18:04 PM »
The problem come at this, The police officer did not know he was a felon or a CCW holder BEFORE detaining and disarming him. The evidence came onlt after he was detained and searched for the sole reason of carrying a firearm.

The article states the officer observed Rodriguez carrying a concealed weapon.  Being a felon and  having no permit,  he may have resisted, that is why he was forcefully disarmed.  If I was carrying a concealed weapon legally and a LEO came up to question me, I would put my hands where he can see 'um and let him know I have a CCW permit.

I don't know all the details and don't want to speculate.  In any case, Gorsuch opinion in the Rodriguez case does not make him anti 2a.  It would have been better for 2a rights with Hardiman, but Gorsuch is not a bad choice for the 2a community.
Happily living in Puna