Gorsuch is Great, Because Left-Wing Slate Hates Him

I encourage conservatives of all backgrounds to read the liberal press.

The progressive websites are even better.

Why?

Because every day, in their pages they are panicking about the Trump Administration.

Trump is getting rid of the stupid environmentalist policies.

He is governing by the rule of law, rather than the rule of feelings.

He has rejected the grievance industry which Barack Obama had intended to keep alive.

All the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights are being restored to their full glory, even though the regressive left

Neil Gorsuch is everything liberals feared—and more.

On Monday, Justice Neil Gorsuch revealed himself to be everything that liberals had most feared: pro-gun, pro–travel ban, anti-gay, anti–church/state separation. He is certainly more conservative than Justice Samuel Alito and possibly to the right of Justice Clarence Thomas. He is an uncompromising reactionary and an unmitigated disaster for the progressive constitutional project. And he will likely serve on the court for at least three more decades.

This is the best news I have read yet!

All of it is printed for everyone to read in Slate Magazine.

So much winning, because there is so much whining from the Left!

Although Gorsuch has barely been on the bench for two months, he has already had an opportunity to weigh in on some of the most pressing constitutional issues of our time. In each case, he has chosen the most conservative position. On Monday, Gorsuch indicated that he opposes equal rights for same-sex couples, dissenting from a ruling that requires states to list same-sex parents on birth certificates. (Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito joined his dissent.) 

This is great! I am proud of my President, and I am so glad that he nominated Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme COurt of the United States!

That, alone, is startling: In Obergefell v. Hodges, the court held that the Constitution compels states to grant same-sex couples “the constellation” of “rights, benefits, and responsibilities” that “the states have linked to marriage,” including “birth and death certificates.” Obergefell, then, already settled this issue. Gorsuch’s dissent suggests he may not accept Obergefell as settled law and may instead seek to undermine or reverse it.

The Supreme Court is not the Supreme Being. We have all had this discussion before. The United States Constitution is not some kind of living document, written in wet cement which allows lawyers in bad dresses to decide whether they are going to rewritten or ignore key passages in the charter or in any law.

Gorsuch also joined Thomas in dissenting from the court’s refusal to review a challenge to California’s concealed carry laws. California grants concealed carry permits for “good cause”—namely, a “particularized need, substantiated by documentary evidence, to carry a firearm for self-defense.” 

Wow! I didn't know about this, until Slate reported on it. I am so glad that Gorsuch is not afraid to be an independent, conservative mind on the Supreme Court!

.Thomas and Gorsuch dissented vociferously, essentially declaring that the Second Amendment grants individuals a right to carry loaded firearms in public. Not even the archconservative Alito joined their bizarre opinion. It appears Gorsuch is eager to strike down almost any law that limits the right “to keep and bear arms” in any way.

AWESOME!

Monday also revealed Gorsuch’s deep hostility to the separation of church and state. He joined Chief Justice John Roberts’ opinion for the court in Trinity Lutheran v. Comer, holding that a state may not constitutionally refuse to subsidize houses of worship. The court, joined by Gorsuch, held that, when a state declines to fund a church’s improvement project, it somehow violates the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. 

The winning! The winning never ends! This is so awesome!

Gorsuch joined Roberts’ opinion ... both justices wrote separately to declare that they’d go further, holding that any disparate treatment of religious organizations likely runs afoul of the Constitution. That seemingly benign statement implies that both justices would force states to funnel more taxpayer money to churches and religious groups. To their minds, the government discriminates against religion when it refuses to subsidize it.

The First Amendment should receive as much latitude as possible, and private religious schools should not be discriminated against for being ... religious schools.

Then, finally, there’s the travel ban ruling ... Gorsuch, joined by Thomas and Alito, opposed this compromise: He would’ve let the travel ban take effect in its entirety, as he believes it to be lawful. So much for the fantasy of Gorsuch standing up to Trump.

WOW!

Thank God for Trump, and thank God for Gorsuch.

People, I cannot stress this enough. Start reading ThinkProgress and Slate Magazine. You will find so much good news in their articles, precisely because everything that Trump is doing is driving them crazy.

You will learn all the great things that the President is accomplishing for us, since the mainstream media has spent most of its capital and press coverage going over Russia.