😂,,😂😂😂😂😂 Yeah, our interest in the government is to make sure everybody follows the rules and are all held accountable for what they do.And what you Justice did is absolutely wrong.Giving him immunity, are you serious after what he did?You're just a kangaroo court now
@@brucecampbell4528, his decisions are traitorous and indefensible. And, he lied to the Senate when he said he respected the precedent of Roe v Wade. He should be impeached, like the rest of the Christian extremists on the SCOTUS.
Either way, there's not enough oversight and a clear lack of ethics. All members need not accept gifts from donors. They aren't running for political offices. The acceptance of gifts by donors who may have business before the court, smells very bad. Case in point, there's at least 2 involving Thomas and his mega donor, coming to the court next session. But yeah, go on. SCOTUS needs ethics. I don't care what political side you are on.
So Judge, what happens when there is a criminal in the White House who has already been found guilty and has several court cases looming; one of which involves keeping stolen, top secret documents. Do you believe he should get off Scot free by being immune? Please tell us how you came to that conclusion. Write a book about that gutting of Lady Justice you claim to revere.
Yes he ruled in Trump v. United States that the president could sell pardons or order for his political rival to be taken out by the military and that would be a core presidential act that is absolutely immune from criminal prosecution.
@@mkay3310 So discrasfull and disgusting 😒 SUPREME COURT CRIMINALS 😒 Pathetic! 😡 They lost all credibility and respect... VOTE BLUE ALL THE WAY 💙💦💙💦💙💦💙💦💙🙏
@@Oldleftiehere Gorsuch sees Trump as a persecuted minority who needs protection of the judicial system and the rest of us as a tyrannical majority not needing protection.
Neil Neil Neil! Stop right there. Obfuscation. Yes we want a judge that is such and such as you say, but you did not address selfish or unethical judges. Dude! An independent judiciary is not the main issue here. Think!
Yes and the question is even pretty simple to answer. You need law whenever there is a dispute or a problem to be solved that we can not agree on. And as the world has gotten more complex (just think about all the cases that came up because we invented cars and don't use horses anymore)
Even though he accepted the stolen seat, I hoped he'd move to the center. Not only has he not, but he's proved a bought and paid for, well, liar, and traitor to his oaths. He's plainly lying here. True to form. In the mold of Thomas and Alito, except his political head start due to his corrupt Mom. Filth, with soft words and nice hair.
He shouldn't even be on the supreme court. He has disastrous judgement. Why in hell is he even making the rounds on media networks. What's he trying to do. It's tough to believe he cares about the little guy when billionaires are stuffing the pockets of some of our supreme court justices.
Yeah, he really defended the constitution when he gave Trump immunity. No where in the constitution does it say a president has immunity from crimes he commits while in office. It does say a president can be tried and convicted for his crimes in office when he leaves office. I guess he missed that part. He can lie as fast as Trump can.
Remember when Trump's impeachment lawyers admitted and suggested that he could be chaged for crimes, if any, once he left office. This Court should not even accepted the immunity case.
@@brettwagner2950you are too kind. He is too smart to believe the rubbish he is spouting. It's really insulting that he thinks he can fool people with the cover of complex legal questions. Nonsensical ideas seem complex if you're trying to make sense.
In 2023 an estimated 6.3 million children under five died, 2.9 million of them in the WHO African Region. This is equivalent to five children under 5 years of age dying every minute. Two thirds of these deaths can be attributed to preventable causes. A third of all these deaths are in the neonatal period. 0:22
This is a guy who clearly should remember things like our rivers literally catching on fire, or Superfund sites like Love Canal, with all of the birth defects and cancer, but yes, tell us how we are overregulated. We can go back even earlier to the Gilded Age, or the period of Theodore Roosevelt where, if it wasn't for him, a lot we take for granted wouldn't be in place. Mr. Gorsuch wants to return this country to the Gilded Age when the oligarchs had free reign, obviously because they are who he represents.
Deregulation will deprive us of rights to clean air, safe food , clear water, etc., but i I'm sure Justice Gorsuch will tell us how deregulation will give us those rights back to us.
Great interview, thanks for asking some challenging questions. I don't agree with many of Judge Gorsuch's views and opinions. I also question the way he answered some of your questions and the statistics that he reported describing the balance on the court. I did appreciate hearing him discuss his book, the stories, and his views. Thanks for doing this interview.
trump stole secret documents, caused an insurrection, committed freud, tried to overthrow an election, etc...... and the supreme court didn't do anything, and why don't you tell us why? or are you one of those who get a tax cut? Explain how trump is above the law??? Justice says EVERYONE IS EQUAL!!!!!!!!!!
Neil Gorsuch is out of touch with reality. It's brutal, but it wasn't sudden. Anyone who would accept the promotion that belonged to someone else can't be expected to stray far from the basic Robert Bork mold, weasels who willing to do anything they're told, even if they knew it to be wrong.
Good interview in that it provided insight into Justice Gorsuch's thinking. It also showed his blind spots. Agreement on an ethics guideline that has no accountability is not something to be proud of. Agreement by itself has no value, rather the substance and the impact of the agreement. His answers about abortion were weak. From his viewpoint he didn't think nine people should make the decision. Nine people make life altering decisions through the term of the court. A precedent and a right were established. The court broke precedent and took the right to choose away. Gorsuch stated that Roe was precedent at his confirmation hearing, so in effect he lied. The issue of presidential immunity is an abject failure by this court both in substance and timeliness of response. SCOTUS is a guardian of our Constitution and has not met its obligation. The trust in this court is very low by much of the population. The court did nothing to address the political machinations with Garland's nominations. And, it did nothing to address Trump's nomination in the same time frame. So in effect, the court accepted disparate treatment of seating justices. This court also abstained from participating in an impeachment trial.
Neil... you are out of touch. Oh yeah, we want to like you, but your tone and "playing" with Trumpist thinking, ruins your credibility. For example: you described the arc of the court in glowing terms, neglecting the political dirty pool that has taken place in appointments. You could do a lot sir, but you need to take a good look at yourself and bring it down a notch.
He knows exactly what he’s doing. It is his goal to have people give him the benefit of the doubt and gaslight us to think, he’s only a notch off. He’s a narcissist.
The idea that he presents the fisherman's case as so absurd, yet it was 5 to 4 (clearly along political lines) means there was a LOT more to the charges and they were proven in lower courts for the appeal to come up to supreme court. It also reveals that he's intellectually dishonest.
I read about the poor fisherman in the WSJ a few weeks ago (maybe in National Review) and was quite happy to have it mentionned here. This wonderful interview has pushed me to to buy the book, and I look forward to reading it.
Vice President Harris needs to be elected in November to at the very least ensure that should something happen to Thomas and/or Alito to where they are no longer serving on the Supreme Court over the next 4 years she will be able to replace them with Liberal Justices instead of Conservative Justices. Furthermore, I feel that since we have a Constitutional 2 term (or 10 year) limit on the Presidency, then we should have them on the Congress & Courts as well. I'd prefer a 10 term limit in The House, a 3 term limit in the Senate, & a 20 year limit on all Judges nominated by the President & voted on by The Senate. This is the only way to limit corruption in the federal government by constantly changing it.
I am not even 15 minutes into listening to this and I’m sick to my stomach so this is where I depart looking and listening to this ego maniac who thinks he’s a God
Yes, life is about balance. The court is out of balance. Your extreme rulings are not what the majority of Americans want or need. The immunity you gave to trump is sick! Reform the court!
Corporations are the entities with too much control. Gorsuch is simply trying to foam the runway for fewer regulations for corporations, real individuals be damned. It should have taken Gorsuch a month to write such a book, not four years.
He tring to tell us more. Do you here him say The People......The People are the Sovereign.....this is a huge point. The People are the Boss over gov. The Fundamental law regulates The People. The People's Rights are Secured in Common Law Not Statitory Law.
It‘s troubling that a man whose thinking and conflating, not to mention empty courtesies, are so sloppy plays any role at all in American jurisprudence.
Would have liked to see more follow up to inadequate answers. Like, what happened to change from his testimony that Roe v. Wade was settled precedent to his vote on Dobbs? His answer on the Chevron decision was so misleading. There should have been follow up on so many questions. Disappointing.
He cannot be sincere. What he is saying does not make sense, and he's is pompous. I'm talking about this interview, not his book. I have not read his book, and after this interview I have no desire to.
Invaluable and historic. If the Court or simply the 9 picked one of their own to go forth and weigh in against the general hostility and ignorance and unfimiliarity gathering like a storm over the public this justice proves here the perfect pick. If the Trump decade of 3 cycles of American Presidential electoral climate and weather are long remembered this interview will will feed analysis into the far future.
Is there a recommended book that analyzes Gorsuch's legal reasoning? I have a feeling he has sided overwhelmingly with corporations over the exploited, and, yet, he's trying to peddle the opposite. If pushed, he will play the "Corporations Are People, Too" card.
I don't agree with everything Justice Gorsuch says and I don't agree with everything Major Garrett says, but I respect both. Great interview! Congratulations Major. 45 minutes well spent. Thank you!
They got me in federal court without a warrant. Furthermore I might have to rely on people who have know understanding of the constitution. I put my trust in the Most High.
He is distorting things. In Roe vs Wade for instance he is saying it isn’t right for 9 persons in Washington to decide things for the people. What he fails to say is that prior to the passage of Roe vs Wade about 70% of Americans agreed with allowing abortions. Those people then elected legislators who debated the issue and passed laws authorizing abortions. These laws were then challenged in lower courts and they found that the law met constitutional standards. Then a plaintiff representing a minority faction that didn’t like the law challenged it in the lower courts and filed suit. Then the whole process was repeated. The lower courts all the way up to and through the circuit courts ruled against the plaintiffs, and their ruling was based on evidence. That decision was then appealed to the Supreme Court where they limited the time to hear the case. Witnesses were not presented and direct evidence was not presented. Then the Supreme Court took up the case and ruled that all those people and all those legislators and judges were wrong and said that the issue should be Re legislated, Re tried in lower courts and if necessary retried in the Supreme Court. They, in essence, overturned the well established decision of the people that was legally and well processed at lower levels and said we do not accept the decision of the people or the due process and want the people to start the process all over again until they come up with results that we agree with. Gorsuch is saying we have too many laws. The Roe vs Wade actually was protecting the people from a law that most people felt was unfair and interfering with the right of a woman to chose. The truth of the matter is that the justices that voted to repeal Roe vs Wade were imposing their bias against abortion on the case. Several if not all of them were chosen by Presidents because there were strong indications that they would overturn Roe, even though they said they would never do that are their nomination hearings, that Roe was established law. Stop gaslighting us judge, and trying to tell us you were completely objective and unbiased in making your decision in Roe, because we know better.
The lower courts found them constitutional based on past precedent from 9 justices in Washington. The ruling doesn't prevent states from protecting abortion. You're probably not going to read it but his last book A Republic if You Can Keep it would explain this to you.
Law is to ensure orders are in place in society. There's no too much law only abuse of laws. Like there's no too much order only abuse of conduct. It's our responsibility to ensure proper conduct is in place. We need more than laws to ensure decent operational society. I'm sure as long as proper conduct is in place we shouldn't interfere with others interest and freedom.
WTF is a sitting Justice doing promoting his book on tv. There's a book deal that needs looking at. A JUSTICE WITH A SIDE GIG?
@@handyadams3319 He is a Supreme Court Justice! I think he deserves a little airtime! God knows we waste enough of it on crap
It's not unusual for a justice to write a book. Off the top of my head Scalia did it, Breyer did it (2x). Try reading one.
No wonder they only hear 70 cases a year. They're too busy moonlighting. This Court is corrupt.
I was actually delighted to hear some explanations on how they came to certain decisions that are of great importance.
@@MichelleBarnes-w5r I'd agree, but he is not adding value, he is giving us more crap.
😂,,😂😂😂😂😂 Yeah, our interest in the government is to make sure everybody follows the rules and are all held accountable for what they do.And what you Justice did is absolutely wrong.Giving him immunity, are you serious after what he did?You're just a kangaroo court now
I agree! The supreme court is over reaching, opening the door to ending the constitution. They want the dumspterfire to become a dictator.
Justices don't determine what the law should be they determine what it is.
Not enough law applies to the Supreme Court.
You wouldn't be saying that if you agreed with his decisions.
@@brucecampbell4528, his decisions are traitorous and indefensible. And, he lied to the Senate when he said he respected the precedent of Roe v Wade.
He should be impeached, like the rest of the Christian extremists on the SCOTUS.
Either way, there's not enough oversight and a clear lack of ethics. All members need not accept gifts from donors. They aren't running for political offices. The acceptance of gifts by donors who may have business before the court, smells very bad. Case in point, there's at least 2 involving Thomas and his mega donor, coming to the court next session. But yeah, go on. SCOTUS needs ethics. I don't care what political side you are on.
So Judge, what happens when there is a criminal in the White House who has already been found guilty and has several court cases looming; one of which involves keeping stolen, top secret documents. Do you believe he should get off Scot free by being immune? Please tell us how you came to that conclusion. Write a book about that gutting of Lady Justice you claim to revere.
Yes he ruled in Trump v. United States that the president could sell pardons or order for his political rival to be taken out by the military and that would be a core presidential act that is absolutely immune from criminal prosecution.
@@mkay3310
So discrasfull and disgusting 😒
SUPREME COURT CRIMINALS 😒
Pathetic! 😡 They lost all credibility and respect...
VOTE BLUE ALL THE WAY 💙💦💙💦💙💦💙💦💙🙏
@@Oldleftiehere Gorsuch sees Trump as a persecuted minority who needs protection of the judicial system and the rest of us as a tyrannical majority not needing protection.
Justices don't determine what the law should be they determine what it is.
@@fire_tower Yeah. They’ve turned the Constitution upside down. These guys don’t like the word “co-equal” at all.
Justice, your boy is going down because of the arrogance of this corrupt court.
A true narcissist. In his mind, he’s just tooo smart.
Neil Neil Neil! Stop right there. Obfuscation. Yes we want a judge that is such and such as you say, but you did not address selfish or unethical judges. Dude! An independent judiciary is not the main issue here. Think!
'Too much law?' This guy is not making me want to read his book.
A 'lot of lawsuits', but SCOTUS keeps reviewing settled law!
Yes and the question is even pretty simple to answer. You need law whenever there is a dispute or a problem to be solved that we can not agree on. And as the world has gotten more complex (just think about all the cases that came up because we invented cars and don't use horses anymore)
A lot of frivolous lawsuits, like the immunity case that the Court wasted its time on for the master of frivolous lawsuits, Trump.
Even though he accepted the stolen seat, I hoped he'd move to the center.
Not only has he not, but he's proved a bought and paid for, well, liar, and traitor to his oaths.
He's plainly lying here. True to form.
In the mold of Thomas and Alito, except his political head start due to his corrupt Mom.
Filth, with soft words and nice hair.
He should be in jail together with Trump
🖍️🧠
All the old and Trump-appointed judges should be locked up or or banned from America.
He shouldn't even be on the supreme court. He has disastrous judgement. Why in hell is he even making the rounds on media networks. What's he trying to do. It's tough to believe he cares about the little guy when billionaires are stuffing the pockets of some of our supreme court justices.
He's following orders from de Fuherer
He's selling a book
Yeah, he really defended the constitution when he gave Trump immunity. No where in the constitution does it say a president has immunity from crimes he commits while in office. It does say a president can be tried and convicted for his crimes in office when he leaves office. I guess he missed that part. He can lie as fast as Trump can.
Remember when Trump's impeachment lawyers admitted and suggested that he could be chaged for crimes, if any, once he left office. This Court should not even accepted the immunity case.
Why do you interview these GOP justices and expect anything other than GOP propaganda?
Why do you have a Ukraine flag, Democrat propaganda?
@@brucecampbell4528, where’s your Russian flag?
@@guyjara3920 Why would I have a Russian flag? I'm American.
@@brucecampbell4528 because you’re carrying water for Putin.
@@guyjara3920 Wrong, I'm carrying water for the United States. I could careless about Putin, Russia or Ukraine. It's not our fight.
Yes, too much law….maybe we should ALL get immunity like the king you coronated. Too much law 😂😂😂😂😂😂
Creepy Gorsuch.. yuck
@paulchaves7978 He's one of the good ones for sure.
*He acts like he cares but he really doesn't. He shouldn't have added ROE vs WADE to criminalize women. He's only here to make more money*
I agree. He means well and has some good ideas. But his love of his own voice is evident. I hope he matures over time.
@@brettwagner2950
Good luck with that! VOTE BLUE ALL THE WAY 💙💦💙💦💙💦💙💦💙
@@brettwagner2950you are too kind. He is too smart to believe the rubbish he is spouting. It's really insulting that he thinks he can fool people with the cover of complex legal questions. Nonsensical ideas seem complex if you're trying to make sense.
Everyone including Ruth Bader Ginsburg knew that Roe was a case of weak judicial activism that was always going to be overturned
@@mariarubin4529Dude they aren't that complex. Search Con Law 1 in the search bar.
Being a judge would be so much easier if it wasn’t for laws.
This comment section has made me thoroughly disappointed for the people of our nation.
I don’t take kindly to judges who threaten us, the citizens. He had better watch his own back.
Gorsuch needs to spend some time in prison for sedition
He’s an EMBARRASSMENT TO THE COURT. 💙💙💙💙💙💙🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
He’s just one of several embarrassments on the Court.
🖍️🧠
@@Oldleftiehere TRUE AT LEAST 3 more
What about the ethics of this court?
Neil, go ahead and retire. You can tell all the stories you want while we Americans try to expand the SCOTUS....
Not try . Do.
😂😂😂😂😂
That’s as bad as the interview with Marjorie t green!
In 2023 an estimated 6.3 million children under five died, 2.9 million of them in the WHO African Region. This is equivalent to five children under 5 years of age dying every minute. Two thirds of these deaths can be attributed to preventable causes. A third of all these deaths are in the neonatal period. 0:22
I listened to the first minute of his interview and I already hate this "Judge"
Someone that's above the law with zero accountability telling us little guys what we need, thanks pal.
Harris/Walz 2024 vote all democrats 💙🌊🥥🌴🇺🇲🌈💙🌊🇺🇸.
Vote as if you life depending on it. 🥥🌴🇺🇲🌈💙🌊🇺🇸
🖍️🧠
Vote then out!!!!” 😡👺🤥🤥🤥😤😳🤷🏼♀️
@@Anden1she’ll noooo you will be sorry and you will have no way Out don’t be Ignorant 😡🥵🤥😤🤷🏼♀️
A judge saying we have too many laws…. Hmmmmmmm
Justice Gorsuch cherry picks his favorite anecdotes about overregulation to shore up his cockamamie ideas on deregulation.
This is a guy who clearly should remember things like our rivers literally catching on fire, or Superfund sites like Love Canal, with all of the birth defects and cancer, but yes, tell us how we are overregulated. We can go back even earlier to the Gilded Age, or the period of Theodore Roosevelt where, if it wasn't for him, a lot we take for granted wouldn't be in place. Mr. Gorsuch wants to return this country to the Gilded Age when the oligarchs had free reign, obviously because they are who he represents.
Deregulation will deprive us of rights to clean air, safe food , clear water, etc., but i I'm sure Justice Gorsuch will tell us how deregulation will give us those rights back to us.
"Nine people independently minded..."
The Heritage Foundation 🎉 is singular.
Senator Whitehouse where are you.
💙💙💙Vote All Blue-Vote Harris/Walz 2024 💙💙💙Save Your ❤🤍💙!!
Im There!!!
🖍️🧠
Never With the Devil I have the armor of God don’t Need her at all 🥵😡🤥😤🤷🏼♀️
When we can’t trust each other (what Trump is seeding), there’s no place left to turn , but law…as in You. True Narcissist.
Great interview, thanks for asking some challenging questions. I don't agree with many of Judge Gorsuch's views and opinions. I also question the way he answered some of your questions and the statistics that he reported describing the balance on the court. I did appreciate hearing him discuss his book, the stories, and his views. Thanks for doing this interview.
I don't believe a thing this man says. I don't trust him nor most of the other supreme court judges.
I don't either!!!
That’s right…NO One is above the law…except (fill in the blanks, below)
trump stole secret documents, caused an insurrection, committed freud, tried to overthrow an election, etc...... and the supreme court didn't do anything, and why don't you tell us why? or are you one of those who get a tax cut? Explain how trump is above the law??? Justice says EVERYONE IS EQUAL!!!!!!!!!!
Neil Gorsuch is out of touch with reality. It's brutal, but it wasn't sudden. Anyone who would accept the promotion that belonged to someone else can't be expected to stray far from the basic Robert Bork mold, weasels who willing to do anything they're told, even if they knew it to be wrong.
bro sounds like unsolicited chatGPT
Yeah to many laws unless they're laws that go against your BELIEFS not LAW!
Weird how all of the previous Presidents were able to do the job just fine without worrying about being prosecuted 🤔
Good interview in that it provided insight into Justice Gorsuch's thinking.
It also showed his blind spots. Agreement on an ethics guideline that has no accountability is not something to be proud of. Agreement by itself has no value, rather the substance and the impact of the agreement.
His answers about abortion were weak. From his viewpoint he didn't think nine people should make the decision. Nine people make life altering decisions through the term of the court. A precedent and a right were established. The court broke precedent and took the right to choose away. Gorsuch stated that Roe was precedent at his confirmation hearing, so in effect he lied.
The issue of presidential immunity is an abject failure by this court both in substance and timeliness of response. SCOTUS is a guardian of our Constitution and has not met its obligation.
The trust in this court is very low by much of the population. The court did nothing to address the political machinations with Garland's nominations. And, it did nothing to address Trump's nomination in the same time frame. So in effect, the court accepted disparate treatment of seating justices.
This court also abstained from participating in an impeachment trial.
Yeah, watch how this election is decided on a disdain of this political court.
TY for this interview. This is a breath of fresh air. The tide is turning
Neil... you are out of touch. Oh yeah, we want to like you, but your tone and "playing" with Trumpist thinking, ruins your credibility. For example: you described the arc of the court in glowing terms, neglecting the political dirty pool that has taken place in appointments. You could do a lot sir, but you need to take a good look at yourself and bring it down a notch.
He knows exactly what he’s doing. It is his goal to have people give him the benefit of the doubt and gaslight us to think, he’s only a notch off. He’s a narcissist.
If they want to trade on their positions for sweetheart real estate deals, then Congress needs to take their sweet building away from them.
The idea that he presents the fisherman's case as so absurd, yet it was 5 to 4 (clearly along political lines) means there was a LOT more to the charges and they were proven in lower courts for the appeal to come up to supreme court.
It also reveals that he's intellectually dishonest.
I read about the poor fisherman in the WSJ a few weeks ago (maybe in National Review) and was quite happy to have it mentionned here. This wonderful interview has pushed me to to buy the book, and I look forward to reading it.
Traitor!
He looks like that guy played in all the western shows...always the bad guy!!👀🕷💙💙🐱🐱
What a narcissist!
Creep
Neil u r part of “The bag of rabbits and squirrels “Delay Court 😮
Vote💙all the way
🖍️🧠
So those people during January 6 were just ordinary people who got caught up. BS
Vice President Harris needs to be elected in November to at the very least ensure that should something happen to Thomas and/or Alito to where they are no longer serving on the Supreme Court over the next 4 years she will be able to replace them with Liberal Justices instead of Conservative Justices. Furthermore, I feel that since we have a Constitutional 2 term (or 10 year) limit on the Presidency, then we should have them on the Congress & Courts as well. I'd prefer a 10 term limit in The House, a 3 term limit in the Senate, & a 20 year limit on all Judges nominated by the President & voted on by The Senate. This is the only way to limit corruption in the federal government by constantly changing it.
🖍️🧠
I am not even 15 minutes into listening to this and I’m sick to my stomach so this is where I depart looking and listening to this ego maniac who thinks he’s a God
Note to CBS: this video probably has the shortest watch time of all your stories. Want to comment?
Yes, life is about balance. The court is out of balance. Your extreme rulings are not what the majority of Americans want or need. The immunity you gave to trump is sick! Reform the court!
A Supreme Court judge should not be able to write a book until they retire. This is unethical.
Do you day the same for Justice Sotomayor or Justice Breyer (before he left the court)? Stop it.
Mr Garrett thank you by the way sir. You both are trusted in your words and communication skills
Corporations are the entities with too much control. Gorsuch is simply trying to foam the runway for fewer regulations for corporations, real individuals be damned. It should have taken Gorsuch a month to write such a book, not four years.
Some of the Supreme Court justices can’t handle the freedom they were granted by position. You know who were you are.
What a brilliant well spoke man!
He tring to tell us more. Do you here him say The People......The People are the Sovereign.....this is a huge point. The People are the Boss over gov. The Fundamental law regulates The People. The People's Rights are Secured in Common Law Not Statitory Law.
12:21 Thanks to the convicted felon.
Was that a warning to the supreme judges or what?
How do you explain the flagrant corruption in the superior Court….
Come onnnnn you need to address this Thomas and Alito needs to go now…..
Lets talk about all the companies that have bypassed regulations over the years and then see if deregulation is a good thing.
It‘s troubling that a man whose thinking and conflating, not to mention empty courtesies, are so sloppy plays any role at all in American jurisprudence.
Why is Justice Gorsuch constantly grinning like he is above all these questions?
Jefferson, Madison and LA FAYETTE pinned the constitution actually. Was the only men who could read and right at that level of power
what a crock. did donny approve LOL
Would have liked to see more follow up to inadequate answers. Like, what happened to change from his testimony that Roe v. Wade was settled precedent to his vote on Dobbs? His answer on the Chevron decision was so misleading. There should have been follow up on so many questions. Disappointing.
Potential justices don't take stances on what they will do in appointment hearings.
If you're wondering why you are losing viewers, content like this is the reason
It's always important to hear and see different voices, especially those you may not agree with, to shore up and sharpen your perspective. 😮
He cannot be sincere. What he is saying does not make sense, and he's is pompous. I'm talking about this interview, not his book. I have not read his book, and after this interview I have no desire to.
Immunity? Kings? Usurper.
Nice work, Major.
I made it 51 seconds before my stomach turned…
Invaluable and historic. If the Court or simply the 9 picked one of their own to go forth and weigh in against the general hostility and ignorance and unfimiliarity gathering like a storm over the public this justice proves here the perfect pick. If the Trump decade of 3 cycles of American Presidential electoral climate and weather are long remembered this interview will will feed analysis into the far future.
wow hes messed up
I thought he came off as a very reasonable man and I am surprised.
Is there a recommended book that analyzes Gorsuch's legal reasoning? I have a feeling he has sided overwhelmingly with corporations over the exploited, and, yet, he's trying to peddle the opposite. If pushed, he will play the "Corporations Are People, Too" card.
A Republic if You Can Keep it by Neil Gorsuch. His last book covered exactly that.
Gorsuch is brilliant
My GOD! an honest Judge! WE SHOULD LISTEN 💯
I don't agree with everything Justice Gorsuch says and I don't agree with everything Major Garrett says, but I respect both. Great interview! Congratulations Major. 45 minutes well spent. Thank you!
My home was stolen I have received no justice. How many homes have been stolen over the last decade with FABRICATED INSTRUMENTS.
Who are you people commenting here, bidenits?
Here's a questions can law covers everything that happens in life? It's important thinking is in place during a crisis.
They got me in federal court without a warrant. Furthermore I might have to rely on people who have know understanding of the constitution. I put my trust in the Most High.
Yea, there's something wrong with him.
I won’t overturn roe. Period end of story. Pack the court
Thoses right wings judge in the Superior Court are a joke US the people needs to clean the court and this fast…..
But if the supreme Court decided we the people then how it went to the state and the state still overturned roe vs wade. Something is just wrong.
Stephen Breyer’s book is actually worth reading.
We are free to pay tax,tax,tax snd shut up and vote for clowns
Why wasn't he arrested after threatening the president.?
Probably because he never threatened the President 😂
This dude has so much nerve
💙💙💙
Full of it, delusional
Republicans including Supreme Court judges needs to aplly the rule of law and ot t[o serve party
He is distorting things.
In Roe vs Wade for instance he is saying it isn’t right for 9 persons in Washington to decide things for the people.
What he fails to say is that prior to the passage of Roe vs Wade about 70% of Americans agreed with allowing abortions. Those people then elected legislators who debated the issue and passed laws authorizing abortions. These laws were then challenged in lower courts and they found that the law met constitutional standards. Then a plaintiff representing a minority faction that didn’t like the law challenged it in the lower courts and filed suit.
Then the whole process was repeated. The lower courts all the way up to and through the circuit courts ruled against the plaintiffs, and their ruling was based on evidence. That decision was then appealed to the Supreme Court where they limited the time to hear the case. Witnesses were not presented and direct evidence was not presented. Then the Supreme Court took up the case and ruled that all those people and all those legislators and judges were wrong and said that the issue should be Re legislated, Re tried in lower courts and if necessary retried in the Supreme Court. They, in essence, overturned the well established decision of the people that was legally and well processed at lower levels and said we do not accept the decision of the people or the due process and want the people to start the process all over again until they come up with results that we agree with.
Gorsuch is saying we have too many laws. The Roe vs Wade actually was protecting the people from a law that most people felt was unfair and interfering with the right of a woman to chose.
The truth of the matter is that the justices that voted to repeal Roe vs Wade were imposing their bias against abortion on the case. Several if not all of them were chosen by Presidents because there were strong indications that they would overturn Roe, even though they said they would never do that are their nomination hearings, that Roe was established law.
Stop gaslighting us judge, and trying to tell us you were completely objective and unbiased in making your decision in Roe, because we know better.
The lower courts found them constitutional based on past precedent from 9 justices in Washington. The ruling doesn't prevent states from protecting abortion.
You're probably not going to read it but his last book A Republic if You Can Keep it would explain this to you.
Law is to ensure orders are in place in society. There's no too much law only abuse of laws. Like there's no too much order only abuse of conduct. It's our responsibility to ensure proper conduct is in place. We need more than laws to ensure decent operational society. I'm sure as long as proper conduct is in place we shouldn't interfere with others interest and freedom.