Congress, Constitutional Law, Courts, Justice, Media, Politics, Religion, Supreme Court

TRUMP NOMINATES NEIL GORSUCH FOR THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT

ap17024739756097President Donald Trump has made his choice for the Supreme Court and it is Tenth Circuit Judge Neil Gorsuch, 49.  With the selection, President Trump would be submitting a jurist with unassailable credentials and proven intellect.  He is also someone with a proven conservative record, though there are a few blind spots for those who want a nominee vaccinated against what conservatives view as the David Souter virus — a creeping condition where a conservative gravitates to the left of the Court with time.  Last night, The Hill newspaper ran my column on Gorsuch and his unquestioned qualifications.

Gorsuch comes from what can be viewed as conservative aristocratic stock.  He is the son of David Gorsuch and Anne Gorsuch Burford. His mother achieved fame (or infamy depending on your view) as the first female head of the United States Environmental Protection Agency from 1981 to 1983.  A Reagan appointee, she was forced to resign for failure to turn over documents to Congress in any investigation of the Superfund.  She long maintained that she was following the advice of counsel.  Judge Gorsuch spent time in Washington, D.C. and attended Georgetown Preparatory School and received his B.A. from Columbia University in 1988.  He earned his J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1991 and then received the prestigious  Truman Scholarship and later received a Doctor of Philosophy in Law from University College at Oxford University in 2004 under a Marshall Scholarship.

He went on to  clerk for Judge David B. Sentelle on the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit from 1991–1992, and then for United States Supreme Court Justices Byron White and Anthony Kennedy from 1993–1994.  After going into private practice and becoming a partner, he served as Principal Deputy to the Associate Attorney General, Robert McCallum, at the U.S. Department of Justice from 2005 until 2006.

It is a stellar resume and Gorsuch is widely viewed as a powerful writer and intellectual leader on the Court.  That should be a comfort to conservatives who lost an intellectual icon in Antonin Scalia.

Unfortunately, Gorsuch would continue the problematic exclusion of all schools but Harvard and Yale law schools from the Court.  Gorsuch graduated from Columbia, Harvard, and Oxford. I have previously written how this exclusion can no longer be dismissed as some colossal coincidence.  When you virtually exclude all but two of the nation’s 160 law schools as sources for justices, it not only reduces the number of outstanding candidates but guarantees a certain insularity in training and influences on the court. This bias is not only elitist but decidedly anti-intellectual.

Gorsuch could prove the perfect addition for a right coalition, particularly in working with the Court’s perennial swing justice — Anthony Kennedy.  As a former clerk to Kennedy, Gorsuch could prove key in any future coalitions.  He is also someone who has a good reputation even with liberals (He went to law school with Barack Obama).

Where Gorsuch  may depart from Scalia is in his approach to federal agencies and the Chevron doctrine.  Gorsuch has criticized the decision (a view that I share) and has indicated that he would prefer a less deferential approach to agency decision-making.  Scalia upheld such deference though I have heard that he privately expressed qualms about that aspect of his jurisprudence toward the end of his life.  It is his position on federal agencies that I consider the most interesting in this nominee.  He has warned how federal agencies “concentrate federal power in a way that seems more than a little difficult to square with the Constitution of the framers’ design.”  In a line that could now become prophetic, Gorsuch declared “Maybe the time has come to face the behemoth.”

Another flashpoint may be Gorsuch’s public opposition to assisted suicide.  He is the author of a 2000 law journal and 2oo6 book criticizing state laws allowing assisted suicide.  Six states currently have such laws.  Gorsuch appears to embrace the notion that politicians (unlike judges) can legislate morality.  On both of these issues, he may not appeal to some libertarians or civil libertarians.

Gorsuch’s interpretive style works closely with the text of the Constitution or statutes. He has praised Scalia’s jurisprudence in that regard.  This includes an emphasis on originalism.  He is also known as a strong supporter of religious liberty. He voted in favor of Hobby Lobby and Little Sisters of the Poor in their challenge to the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive mandate.  Gorsuch wrote that the government had transgressed upon  “sincerely held religious beliefs.”

Gorsuch has the intellectual chops to help push forward a new conservative legacy on the Court.  He could be a rallying point not just for the current conservative justices but could be key in a transformative court with possible replacement of any of the three oldest justices: Ginsburg, Kennedy, and Breyer.  All will be in the 80s during Trump’s first term.

 

150 thoughts on “TRUMP NOMINATES NEIL GORSUCH FOR THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT”

    1. Roscoe Coltrane – that is happening only to liberals. I feel younger every day he is in office.

  3. If the mere act of choosing assorted law schools is considered the solution to forming a well-rounded and diversified group of jurists, why not investigate graduates of Whittier Law School, in California, which has the vaulted distinction of being one of the worst, if not the worst, ABA-accredited law school in the country? Reminds me of the same frightening mentality, ascribed to during various revolutions, where the intelligentsia were forced to work the fields and the uneducated rice farmers were brought into hospitals to perform surgery–all in an effort to prove how equal the members of the society were under the wonders of Communism.

    1. There are dozens of crappy law schools in CA, churning out attorneys who have no chance of employment, who will then resort to ambulance chasing and quasi-legal shake-down tactics to earn a living. That is why many companies won’t do business in CA, and for those who do, the higher costs are passed on to consumers. But that situation is a result of the CA Legislature and the voters who elect them apparently believing that everyone should have the opportunity to be a lawyer, regardless of academic ability or the economic impact of tens of thousands of unemployable lawyers in the state. But none of that is relevant to the SCOTUS situation. There are dozens of highly estimed law schools with stellar academic programs whose graduates would add to the intellectual vigor of the court, without being from the same H/Y, taught by the same professors at the same school cult.

      1. You seem to have missed the point of my comment. The quest to choose jurists from schools other than Harvard and Yale, basing that decision upon the faulty premise that all graduates of those institutions hold similar perspectives or values, is an odd and nonsensical pursuit. The current individual, named by Trump, for the Supreme Court, allegedly attended Harvard Law School with Obama. Now, you actually believe that those two Harvard Law graduates, who, purportedly, attended that institution at the very same time and were exposed to the identical professors, have anything, whatsoever, in common, in terms of backgrounds, life experiences or value systems? They are remarkably dissimilar from one another, with contrasting, as opposed to similar, backgrounds, experiences and worldviews. Admit it. Seeking graduates from various law schools, out of some ill-conceived and flawed notion that it brings about diversity of thought and background, makes little, if any, sense. Or, if you wish, we could continue to investigate who and what Whittier has to offer the bench.

        1. I’m just fascinated by potential proof that Obama Baby Jesus really did attend Harvard. Wonder if Judge Gorsuch might have any recollections of O’s attendance?

          1. Actually, my thoughts, exactly. It was the first, and only, time that I can ever recall anyone–anyone–being credited with having attended law school with Obama at Harvard. That’s what the media, however, is now claiming.

          2. FFS – I think Obama Baby Jesus did go to Harvard, since he appears as editor of the Law Review. However, I would be interested to know if he actually went to class?

            1. My understanding is that he never published any papers in all the years he “attended” and “taught” there. And like bam bam, I have never seen any story regarding a classmate, teacher, acquaintance, student, etc. from his years there or at any other school. But the records are sealed, so I guess we’ll never know.

  4. He skis double black diamond trails at age 49. According to the Constitution that entitles him to automatic confirmation.

        2. OH, I love Mazzy Star, too! I just learned about them maybe 18 months or so ago, but sooo cool! Especially “Sweet Mary of Silence.” I bought the CD on amazon, just to help support them. The Bambi Molesters are a Croatian band. Some of those Eastern European bands really rock. There is a Czech or Hungarian Rockabilly band that is great, but I can’t think of their name. They are buried in my downloads. I will try to find them for you.

          If you want something different, and totally mesmerizing try William Albright’s rags:

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvWCoMhpVdI

          There is a CD/download on Amazon where a girl named Nicola Melville plays them all. I love the Nightmare Fantasy Rag, which in the above. My father had a record of this guy which is how I discovered him.

          Squeeky Fromm
          Girl Reporter

          1. Squeeky – your band, the Bambi Molesters, reminds of a great little animated short “Bambi meets Godzilla” It is probably on Youtube.

              1. Squeeky – Glad you liked it. Saw it at a Short Film Festival many, many years ago. It was the hit of the festival. 🙂

          2. Another excellent group ForePlay with some licks reminiscent of Wes Montgomery at times and back in time the first of ABBA style the Spanish group Mocedades. I really like the live version of Maleguena Bimbo Molester thanks for the recommendations.

            1. I downloaded a “How To Play Jazz Like Wes Montgomery” book from a jazz guitar website, but I sound nothing like Wes. Well, maybe like Wes before he learned to play guitar. 🙂 My downloader for Firefox is bugging out right now, and my download ability is restricted. I think youtube is changing the script on the videos or something. But I will look up Mocedades!

              There is a great (to me) mix on youtube that I have posted here before, and this is the first of like 5 or 6 mixes. But this is very listenable, especially The Girl Who Faded Away by the Hangmen. Which I learned the chords to with Riffstation. Beautiful song. I just learned about this genre last year. It is called Garage Rock, and was 20 years before me. But here is the first:

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOyA7aK0HqU

              Squeeky Fromm
              Girl Reporter

              1. News Rover is a hint. And I found one copy of the Jackie Evancho America The Beautiful Album first one I discovered and it IS Gone! The only Montgomery I’m missing is the original ‘Day In The Life Of ‘ Album.

                  1. Opted for the CD format. Worth the extra since I don’t have a way to do vinyl on the boat. THANKS!

  6. Congratulations to Judge Gorsuch.

    It is certainly worth exploring the underlying cause of the two university club among the current and past justices. Surely I cannot imagine it being some litmus test required before any other considerations are forwarded. Surely I have not studied this with regard to the makeup of the Supreme Court but I have done some research into systems and how they can produce an increasingly predictable result.

    With brevity in mind once can create a system that, simply put, is a feedback loop where the output formulates the next iteration’s input; thereby over time creating a more concentrated and uniform series of exports. In other words, the criteria used to process the next result is based upon the output of the previous result.

    Possibly in the case of the court’s members, in the past it could be that graduates of these universities brought forward traits and qualities held in high regard with an emphasis at the schools of service through aspiring to be judges and similar careers. Over time, graduates might have gravitated towards the judiciary through encouragement and established a common skillset. That skillset then became the de facto measure of the traits sought in appellate appointees since the selection of the time represented a quality and a standard.

    From there forward the selection of new appointees was measured against that existing standard, resulting in new appointees only being of the same mold. With subsequent generations of new appointees only the Harvard/Yale method and approach received appointments because while not necessarily better on an individual basis against graduates of other institutions, the approach used by the two is the only standard that is permitted to be measured.

    One method to break this cycle is to intercede with an overhaul of the selection criteria that removes the confirmation bias manifest and endemic to the current selection regiment. To do so might also include a wild card of sorts that can elevate a particular set of candidates credentialed by having a trait that is both great and beneficial but also involves a metric that is completely removed from the original selection standard.

    A way to research this wild card is to find a trait that is not possessed by the Yale/Harvard group and mark that trait as having a highly weighted datum. This can help introduce outsiders into the result and after several generations of process the wildcarded appointees will change the demographic of the judiciary in such a way that the feedback loop occurs with less frequency until hopefully it will dissolve over time.

  7. This article is very well written and is informative. I agree with JT about too many Harvard and Yale grads on the Supreme Court. I might add that none have ever tried civil or criminal jury trials. The Harvard Yalie thing makes them think that their feces don’t stink.

    I am going to do some more research on the new Justice. I do not think it provident for the Dems to filly buster.

    1. Practical side. Think of all the votes we’re gaining and all they are losing. We don’t have to do a thing they will destroy themselves. Good for us and good for them. win win.win

  8. I have no doubt that what I thought when Donald Trump was elected to the USA Presidency has started to happen. President Trump is a catalyst that will cause violent mixing, boiling and a high voltage output to the chemical mix that the United States society is. It is for us to experience and survive the effects of each step of the chemical procedure. Wishing to meet you all in four years at the output, alive and one piece!

    1. No problem besides the other skills I was sent through a combined engineering, physics and chemistry course and learned how to explode – safely – any number of chemical mixes. One just has to look at it objectivly and not….as I stated elsewhere intrinsically or subjectively. If you don’t understand not to worry we have people who do and they will guide you safely – only just follow instructions exactly.

  9. Forcing women to remain pregnant because the government tells them so isn’t exactly small government, and not every woman can afford to cross state lines.

    Nor is it small government when individuals of sound mind choose to end their lives because of very real diseases or horrendous quality-of-life conditions: a serious decision that is nobody’s business but their own.

    This nominee is another nutbag in favor of protecting pre-born cells over the conscious suffering of living citizens.

      1. Hogwash. Not getting pregnant is very simple. Most girls who have abortions just don’t want to grow up and change little dirty diapers, or wipe little snotty noses. Another large subset have gotten knocked up by some dude they do not wish to spend the rest of their lives dealing with in one form or another. Then, the women who can’t afford a baby, and then victims of rape who didn’t take a morning after pill. The heart of the whole matter though, is simply gross immaturity and irresponsibility. Maybe as a society we need to start requiring young people to grow the eff up.

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

        1. Or like he one Supreme Court Judge openly support age of consent being lowered to 12. Whats’ her name the crone?

        2. Squeeky — I doubt you can provide the evidence to support your claims about the reasons most women have abortions. But no matter. Your smug disapproval of their life styles, the reason for them becoming pregnant, and their choice to terminate their pregnancy is irrelevant. You don’t get to make these choices for other people. It is not your body. Do as you please with your own body. Stay the hell out of the choices others make about their own. If you are going to advocate that the state intrude into one of the most personal matters of an individual’s life to make a decision for them, then you should have no problem with permitting the state to be employed to make other decisions for individuals on other matters just as deeply personal or less so, the very thing that those of your political mindset frequently criticize liberals for advocating. Obamacare comes to mind.

        3. Hey, “Squeeky”: If a woman wants to have sex with a guy she doesn’t want to spend the rest of her life dealing with, that’s her own business, not yours, and certainly not the government’s. Butt out with your moral arrogance.

          1. It’s not just her business if she has to kill a little baby. That’s the whole thing about being pregnant – – – there is someone else growing inside you. Another little human being. And no, I don’t feel like a busybody telling women to not murder their babies.

            Women having sex with losers is their business, but maybe that business model is flawed. Maybe that is why so many women are mentally ill, and on anti-depressants. These guys are pigs, but I think they are right on this:

            http://www.returnofkings.com/71027/there-is-scientific-proof-that-feminism-is-failing-women

            Squeeky Fromm
            Girl Reporter

    2. Dave,

      The govt. didn’t force them to get pregnant, that was their decision. Once it happens you are no longer a single entity. I always wonder when liberals say this is about women’s health. What exactly are we curing here? Also, if a person murders a pregnant woman, should they be charged for two counts?

  10. Congress does not have to have hearing and a vote. As you said …. ” I have said previously that I believe that the Senate should give the nominee a hearing and a vote. However, there is nothing in the Constitution that requires (or would compel) such action”

    1. There are only two qualifications to become a member of the Supreme Court. Age, gender, ethnicity, citizenship etc are not on the list. Are ready

      Nomination ……by the President

      Confirmeation ….by the Senate

      The senate is allowed to set it’s own rules and procedures but per Constitution the qualificatrions are as listed above.

  12. Regarding the issue of religious rights, i.e. Hobby Lobby and other enterprises that exist in the WHOLE but are run by a particular type of religious affiliated; if the Supreme Court is going to rule from a bench shared with religious doctrine then what happens when Islam demands a place at the bench, Judaism, etc.? The precedent set by standing up for one religion extends to religion in general. Or, the result will be no different than the cesspools in the Middle East, the ones American looks down on due to their religious extremism.

    The direction of acknowledging religion over civil law and rights is backwards. If a Christian bakery gets the right to refuse service to gays then what happens when a Muslim bakery refuses service to ????

    1. Uh, why would anybody even go to a Muslim bakery. You know all those signs in bathrooms about washing your hands, etc. Well, Muslims don’t use toilet paper. Sooo, do you really want that glazed donut???

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

      1. You have to understand Isaac IS more than a touch backwards. so do you know the trouble with doughnuts on a diet menu? The hole couonts as zero calories BUT you have to eat the outside to get to the inside.

      2. Squeeky — How typical. Provide a comment totally irrelevant to the main point being made.

        1. It’s something I just learned about today on Twitter, while looking at Boycott Starbucks tweets, and I it was kinda totally unexpected and unthought of by me. Then when Isaac mentioned Muslim bakeries, it was like KERBLOOOOOM! The Universe was talking to me, saying “Share the toilet paper thing! Share the toilet paper thing!” sooo I shared it. Believe me, that is not something that I even wish to think about, because I have bought some stuff at a Muslim run gas station that has some fresh food for sale. You know, like Hot Wings, and potato patties, and sandwiches. Sooo, now I am like wondering if that was a big mistake on my part???

          Squeeky Fromm
          Girl Reporter

          1. Squeeky – we have signs in places in AZ where it says Employees Must Wash Their Hands Before Leaving.

        1. On the Jeff Davis, in Crystal City, just a few miles from the White House is an Afghani restaurant that is so crowded that is is hard to find parking or a seat inside. Judging by the accents and chapeau the menu us utterly authentic.

          No word yet whether anyone from the administration is going to drop by for a photo opp.

    2. You buy your cookies elsewhere. It’s called as market economy. Those that deal to a limited clientele get a limited income. Econ 101. How backward are you really?

    3. It’s called being able to discriminate. Without it, we are not free. I would have no issue with a Muslim baker refusing to serve others.

  13. I am sorry to correct you, but a sitting President is not called by the sir name while in office. It is Mr. President or The President. The President is due the respect of office.

    When you refer to President Trump, you are stating that in the past tense. All former Presidents are referred to by the proper name, President Obama, President Bush, President Clinton et al.

      1. True, and many people do not know that the correct pronunciation is not “sir name” but “sir nah me”. Just like it isn’t “lie berry” but “lie brer ee” because the first r is not silent.

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

      2. Paul are teaching basic American English. What happened to the schools system?

          1. ” I blame it on the Common Core.”

            Contradicted by the evidence – perhaps Common Core is a contributing factor. But the decline in writing skills, reasoning ability and basic knowledge has been going on for decades, and long before Common Core.

            BTW, did you notice the WAPO article regarding schools in Montgomery county, MD?

            https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/montgomery-countys-wrong-tack-on-culturally-diverse-education/2017/01/20/ae613906-de67-11e6-acdf-14da832ae861_story.html?utm_term=.85f5810e9abc

            Apparently they use a paradigm called culturally responsive teaching which holds that “Social justice must always be a motivation behind CRT research. Part of this social justice commitment must include a critique of liberalism, neutrality, objectivity, color-blindness, and meritocracy as a camouflage for the self-interest of powerful entities of society.”

            I was particularly struck by this sentence in the article “culturally responsive mathematics must first begin with the classroom teacher deconstructing beliefs about mathematics as a culturally neutral subject, as universal truth, as a non-reasoning system, and, as an exclusively European and Western discipline.”

            Imagine that, the truths of mathematics are really social constructs that depend on culture?

            As for mathematics as an ‘exclusively European and Western discipline’, apparently the great contributions of Arab and Indian mathematicians escaped the attention of the academics who developed culturally responsive teaching.

            Apparently the practitioners of CRT need some serious help understanding and appreciating different cultures – particularly when it comes to mathematics.

            1. this may help… or not.

              Three types of teaching intrinsicism (rationalism), objectivism learning information at the same time learning how to find the nformation or the answer, and subjectivism oh just go around the room and see if you can find something that interests you.

              This is a common core type question for the younger grades which reverses the learning procedure. ‘If the points of a line are divided into two sets, such that all the points of one set precede in order of the points on a line all those of the second set, then there is one and onlyone point which separates the points of the two sets’ Can you guess what subject? To continue “And that’s the answer which leads us to…. and in the end they arrive at two parallel lines. it’ some strange form of teaching geometry. which holds start with the end and work your way to the beginning

              Subjectivism If you read a thing in three places or hear it in three places or say it in three places it’s safe to use. Source Marx, Goebbels and Hitler translation anything said that supports the party is the truth and in todays secular regressive version. Current source George Yoda Lykoff and James Carville to name two but any member of the secular regressives will understand it as it’s one of the few statements that doesn’t change definition day to day so is their version of a universal. Just read Benson and Isaac. If you can stand the boredom.

              intrinsic subjective objective

              source https://campus.aynrand.org/campus-courses/philosophy-of-education/how-to-teach-proper-thinking-methods?s=7

              One of the intermediate courses given in four parts. Their history of Philosophy is excellent if you want to brush up on that.

              1. ” it’ some strange form of teaching geometry. which holds start with the end and work your way to the beginning”

                Hmmm, … maybe they never heard of the Socratic method.

                It does help explain why so many seem to think it is OK to start with the conclusion and work back to develop the arguments and try to find supporting evidence.

          2. I suspect the 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act initiated the long slide into educational mediocracy, not Common Core. ESEA injected federal money and eventually federal standards favored by Washington elites, into education which had been entirely under state and local control. Parents’ input into their children’s was diminished in favor of federal bureaucrats’ and teachers unions’ preferences. Educating children has become a secondary goal, which is now subordinate to the well being of teachers and administrators.

    2. Actually, only the sitting President is referred to as “President.” There is only one at a time. Former Presidents take whatever title they held before the Presidency. Former President Obama should be addressed as “Senator” and former President Bush (W) as “Governor.” Former Presidents seem to like holding on to the title, though, so the standard has slipped.

  14. Three or four more to go. Your wish may come true between the administrations of Trump and Pence.

    1. I am with you and NickS on that. Time for justices other than the Ivy League. We need some University of Texas justices, and some Tulaners, and some from The University of Arkansas system, because as Penelope says, the Arkansas lawyers kicked the crap out of the Ivy League boys back in the Clinton/Whitewater days.

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

      1. Hell, the Constitution doesn’t even require them to be lawyers. How about one accomplished lay person? James Madison wasn’t a lawyer and he wrote the darn thing.

        1. Putting the unqualified at the SCOTUS is a mistake. They might sit uncomfortably on the bench and adopt the doctrine of “stare with indecisiveness”

          1. Not really, accomplished lay persons like Colin Powell, Warren Buffett, Melinda Gates, Rabbi Arthur Schneier or maybe a Nobel prize winner might be a refreshing change to the high court. They certainly have proven they can parse big issues, make good decisions and deal effectively with people. Could they do any worse than some of the lamebrains we see now on the Court? If the founders wanted only lawyers and judges, they would have said so. Pretty smart guys.

      2. Well, then, Squeeky, I’m your guy. Harvard College, UT School of Law, a lifetime of fighting for middle income folks against the forces of evil. Just give me a few months to wrap up my practice.

  16. Thanks for hosting the event. and Nick. there are three or four more to go.He did get someone from flyover country!

  17. I too was hoping Trump would get out of the OCD Harvard/Yale law school cabal.

    1. Nick – I think Trump is going to have 2 or 3 more chances to change the collegiate makeup of the court.

  18. It is going to be a blood bath in the Senate for the hearings. Raincoats and waders should be made available.

  19. How long before the Dems start calling Gorsuch names like racist, homophobe, misogynist, xenophobe, etc.???

    I am betting 12 seconds. The time it takes to choke, spit out their drink, and then start typing.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

    1. The Dems have nothing else, hopefully those Dems up for election where President Trump won will be sent packing next go around.

  20. Why do you say that the law school exclusion is anti-intellectual although I agree that Georgetown should be represented.

    1. Because group-think is not intellectual. These folks have all been trained in the same schools, same traditions, same culture and same professors. They come from the same social class and grew-up in the same NE geographic area. Trump had promised some diversity on his SCOTUS selection, in terms of selecting justices from outside the Harvard/Yale grip on the court, as well as identifying qualified candidates with broader geographic and social backgrounds. Unfortunately, Trump didn’t keep his word. This guy is cut from the same cloth as all the rest. I’m very disappointed.

      1. and if that excuse doesnt work we’ll have another version tomorrow .. I’m going to come out against any choices from the Ivy League etc. and California. Colorado is a good start but I’m not going to be happy until all the choices are from fly over country. Hey I can imitate a regressive better than they can.

        It was a good choice and dumping what’s her name was another good choice. Now if McCollum would just press his little red button a couple of times Shumer could spend the rest of time smoking in the boys room.

        1. I suppose he’s “from” flyover country, as you put it, in the sense that he was born in Denver and lived there for his first 14 years, at which time he moved to Washington, D.C. when his mother was appointed by Reagan to head the EPA (yes, just your average folks). He spent the next 25 years on the East Coast in private prep school, Columbia, Harvard (side trip to Oxford, England to pick up a degree in philosophy); then of course, back to D.C. for the judicial clerkships and corporate law firm. In 2005 he was appointed by Bush to the 10th Circuit, so he returned to Denver after living on the the East Coast for a quarter of a century.

Comments are closed.