0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
https://twitter.com/joshscampbell/status/1312217137964969984
Quote from: bucket on October 02, 2020, 09:57:55 PMhttps://twitter.com/joshscampbell/status/1312217137964969984Yup, no doubt. I know a guy who attend the same event for Gorsuch, and from the sounds of it there's a lot of hobnobbery.
Aren't textualism and originalism conflicting methodologies?
ugh so cringeyhttps://twitter.com/kkhasissues/status/1316067910855675909
Quote from: michigancat on October 13, 2020, 03:46:05 PMugh so cringeyhttps://twitter.com/kkhasissues/status/1316067910855675909How is that even close to cringey?
Quote from: I_have_purplewood on October 13, 2020, 09:10:32 PMQuote from: michigancat on October 13, 2020, 03:46:05 PMugh so cringeyhttps://twitter.com/kkhasissues/status/1316067910855675909How is that even close to cringey?Feigning being impressed that a judge nominated to the highest court can quote cases from “years ago.” Regular lawyer dorks like Spracne and Dickstone can quote cases from years ago.
Quote from: 8manpick on October 13, 2020, 09:17:07 PMQuote from: I_have_purplewood on October 13, 2020, 09:10:32 PMQuote from: michigancat on October 13, 2020, 03:46:05 PMugh so cringeyhttps://twitter.com/kkhasissues/status/1316067910855675909How is that even close to cringey?Feigning being impressed that a judge nominated to the highest court can quote cases from “years ago.” Regular lawyer dorks like Spracne and Dickstone can quote cases from years ago.Particularly given that she knew exactly what topics would be at hand. It isn't like there were going to be a bunch of questions about intricate property law precedent.
Quote from: MakeItRain on October 13, 2020, 10:04:27 PMQuote from: 8manpick on October 13, 2020, 09:17:07 PMQuote from: I_have_purplewood on October 13, 2020, 09:10:32 PMQuote from: michigancat on October 13, 2020, 03:46:05 PMugh so cringeyhttps://twitter.com/kkhasissues/status/1316067910855675909How is that even close to cringey?Feigning being impressed that a judge nominated to the highest court can quote cases from “years ago.” Regular lawyer dorks like Spracne and Dickstone can quote cases from years ago.Particularly given that she knew exactly what topics would be at hand. It isn't like there were going to be a bunch of questions about intricate property law precedent.So why would that make anyone cringe? So many other things that happened today that are so more worthy of a cringe.