Forums

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Both she and Gorsuch missed key facts.

The problem is endemic with lawyers as a whole, we are accustomed to getting our argument based on our client's interest and making the facts conform, which is exactly the wrong way to do this. Facts matter.

I think we ought to get some non-lawyers on the court, people who know how to reason instead of argue. If he weren't so old, I'd suggest Fauci.

People can disagree, I suppose, about the wisdom of the regulation in question, but it really isn't what the the Supreme Court should be deciding. As an exercise in statutory construction, it would have been an easy case except that that the conservative movement has made vaccines a hot-button issue. Conservatives who had no problems with vaccination requirements a few years ago have discovered lately that staking out the opposite position is a matter of vital principle. And so the conservatives on the Court were motivated, or obliged, or both, to construct a completely ridiculous construction of a decades-old statute. Everyone on the Court knows how to reason. That's not the problem.