
What U.S. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch did in his opinion proclaiming that civil rights in employment requires recognition of gay rights was abominable enough, but what it revealed about his view of his role as a justice is even worse.
Conservative critiques of Gorsuch’s pretentious preening aside—if Justice Antonin Scalia were alive, he’d be turning over in his grave at this supposedly “textualist” opinion his replacement authored—Republican lawmakers may be breathing a sigh of relief. Gorsuch took them off the hook and eliminated the necessity of voting on proposals expanding employment protections to cover discrimination against gays, which House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s Democratic majority favors.
Republicans duck so many issues their supine postures must be frozen.
In fact, Gorsuch’s court action may have improved Republican chances in both the Senate and the House in 2020 (even as it compromises President Trump’s ability to boast about his court picks).
Gorsuch’s failure to stay in his lane reminds us of the bizarre defense of Obamacare written by Chief Justice John Roberts, who joined Gorsuch in his farcical reasoning in this case. It is rightly said that Roberts tried to remove the Supreme Court from politics but did so at the cost of separating the constitution from our laws.
[Read It All]
See Also: