Today, President Donald J. Trump nominated Judge Neil Gorsuch of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit to fill the Supreme Court vacancy created by the passing of Justice Antonin Scalia. The nomination of Judge Gorsuch comes after a selection process marked by an unprecedented level of transparency and involvement by the American voters. White House News Release
Related posts
-
Senators call for audit of TSA’s facial recognition tech as use expands in airports | The Record from Recorded Future News
Source: therecord.media 11/22/24 A bipartisan group of 12 senators on Wednesday sent the Department of Homeland... -
-
SORNA Case Advances in Federal Court; PLF Files Motion for Summary Judgment
The Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF) filed a motion for summary judgment on November 18 in its...
Trump picks Neil Gorsuch for SCOTUS nomination. May not be a bad pick, could have been a lot worse. It was better than many of his Cabinet picks.
New SCOTUS judge Gorsuch has made at least one positive ruling in SO issue
https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2016/aug/2/tenth-circuit-finds-compelled-incriminating-sex-offender-polygraphs-unconstitutional/
great read for trumps pick
https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2794096/united-states-v-nichols/
The New Supreme Court Nominee, Niel Gorsch, was on the panel in Doe v. Shurtleff, which concluded that the secondary effects of constitutional speech (i.e., the “high and frightening” sexual recidivism and vulnerability of minors on the internet) of sex offenders, gave the State of Utah a rational basis for requiring the disclosure of internet identifiers.
Note, that SCOTUS law regarding the secondary effects doctrine was in regard to zoning laws (adult stores increasing crimes rate and thus being zoned out), and was never meant to being applied to pure First Amendment speech cases – but it was applied so in Doe v. Shurtleff.
If he sits on the Court in time to vote on Packingham, I am positive we will lose the case.
He is only an “Orginalist,” if it doesn’t come to sex offenders.
I hope the last part of this statement is true.
“It would be a mistake to assume that Gorsuch would always rule the same way as Scalia. He may be more willing than Scalia was to rein in administrative agencies. He has called into question Supreme Court precedents that command judicial deference to the legal interpretations of those agencies. He has been skeptical, as well, of agencies that purport to apply regulations retroactively.”
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/444437/neil-gorsuch-antonin-scalia-supreme-court-textualist-originalist-heir
“Gorsuch has voted to enforce the Fourth Amendment in favor of the most unsympathetic defendants.
He concurred in United States v. Krueger in 2015, concluding that officers violated the Fourth
Amendment while searching a suspect’s home in Kansas for evidence of distribution of child pornography. A magistrate in Oklahoma, Gorsuch held, invoking the original understanding of the
Fourth Amendment, didn’t have authority to issue a warrant for the search of a home in Kansas. And siding with the defendant in another child pornography case, United States v. Ackerman in
2016, Gorsuch held that the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children’s search of a suspect’s private e-mails implicated the Fourth Amendment, because the center was acting like a government agent when it conducted the search. Gorsuch’s willingness to side, twice, with suspected child pornographers is vivid evidence of his willingness to enforce the Fourth Amendment wherever it leads.”
Source: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/02/a-jeffersonian-on-the-supreme-court/515319/
Here is a fairly good list of Gorsuch’s decisions while on the 10th Circuit compiled by researchers at Scotusblog.com. Several of the decisions deal directly with SORNA and sex offenders.
http://www.scotusblog.com/2017/02/judge-neil-gorsuch-10th-circuit/#more-251597