|
Neil Gorsuch on Principles & Values
|
|
Ok to display donated Ten Commandments in public park
Gorsuch has criticized doctrines that limit religious expression in public spaces. In Summum v. Pleasant Grove City, in 2007, Gorsuch joined a dissent from denial of rehearing a case [about] the ability of the government to display a donated Ten
Commandments monument in a public park without accepting all other offers of donated monuments. The subsequent Supreme Court decision adopted the reasoning of that dissent.Gorsuch also has a pair of dissenting opinions (American Atheists 2010, and
Haskell County 2009) in which he criticizes the "reasonable observer" test for establishment clause cases as far too likely to find impermissible endorsements of religion by the government when none was intended, and thus to prevent religious adherents
from reasonably participating in public life. The common thread in these cases is a sense that the government can accommodate deeply held religious views.
Source: ScotusBlog.com on SCOTUS confirmation hearings
, Jan 13, 2017
States cannot sue each other over eased voting rules.
Justice Gorsuch wrote the concurrence on Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton: "TX v. PA, GA, MI & WI" on Dec 11, 2020:
Summary of lawsuit, Dec. 7:: The 2020 election suffered from significant and unconstitutional irregularities including:
- Michigan's Secretary of State, without legislative approval, unilaterally abrogated [under the pandemic emergency] several statutes requiring signature verification for absentee ballot applications. [Similar in GA, PA, & WI].
- Pennsylvania's election law requires that poll-watchers be granted access to the opening, counting, and recording of absentee ballots: Local election officials [in 2 counties] decided not to follow this law.
- Georgia state law prohibits the opening of absentee ballots until after the polls open on Election Day: In April 2020, without legislative approval, [a new rule] authorized processing absentee ballots three weeks before Election Day.
- The Wisconsin Elections Commission positioned hundreds of drop boxes to collect absentee ballots--including the use of unmanned drop boxes, in contravention of Wisconsin law.
Supreme Court Order, Dec. 11: The State of Texas's motion is denied for lack of standing under Article III of the Constitution. Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections. All other pending motions are dismissed as moot.
Texas Tribune analysis, Dec. 11:: Trump--and Republicans across the country--had pinned their hopes on the Texas suit. In a series of tweets, Trump called it "the big one" and later added, "it is very strong, ALL CRITERIA MET." If the court had heard the case, Sen. Ted Cruz said he would have argued it, at the request of Trump.
Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas indicated they would have allowed Texas to bring the case but said they would "not grant other relief." In a series of tweets after the ruling, Trump raged against the decision, which he called "a disgraceful miscarriage of justice."
Source: Supreme Court case 20-SCOTUS argued on Dec 7, 2020
Page last updated: Mar 21, 2022