A very interesting piece, thank you. I do, however join Sawdust in his comment. There have been more cases decided on the shadow docket on issues involving Trump than in actual written decisions. Transparent? I disagree.
A notable exception, the shadow docket. The court often gives no argument but scolds lower courts for not following the decision. If no reasoning is offered, ones guess is as good as another.
Anything Gorsuch says or does should be evaluated with awareness of the following dishonest characterization of an event (among others!) in his book on regulatory overreach, Over Ruled. He Said: A Florida fisherman (John Yates) was the victim of a "bureaucratic maze" and a crushing "over-regulation" of the sea for accidentally keeping three undersized fish. What He Left Out: Yates wasn't just "whacked" by a rule; he was prosecuted for ordering his crew to destroy evidence and lie to the Coast Guard during an active investigation—actions that go beyond "simple regulation" and into criminal obstruction. How to Verify: Search for legal journalist Ankush Khardori’s review of the book in The New Republic (or Politico), where he details how Gorsuch omits facts in the Yates and "Magician" cases to blame "too many laws" for what was actually standard law enforcement against witness tampering.
A very interesting piece, thank you. I do, however join Sawdust in his comment. There have been more cases decided on the shadow docket on issues involving Trump than in actual written decisions. Transparent? I disagree.
I mean, I mention the shadow docket in the piece.
A mention? Ahem.
A notable exception, the shadow docket. The court often gives no argument but scolds lower courts for not following the decision. If no reasoning is offered, ones guess is as good as another.
Anything Gorsuch says or does should be evaluated with awareness of the following dishonest characterization of an event (among others!) in his book on regulatory overreach, Over Ruled. He Said: A Florida fisherman (John Yates) was the victim of a "bureaucratic maze" and a crushing "over-regulation" of the sea for accidentally keeping three undersized fish. What He Left Out: Yates wasn't just "whacked" by a rule; he was prosecuted for ordering his crew to destroy evidence and lie to the Coast Guard during an active investigation—actions that go beyond "simple regulation" and into criminal obstruction. How to Verify: Search for legal journalist Ankush Khardori’s review of the book in The New Republic (or Politico), where he details how Gorsuch omits facts in the Yates and "Magician" cases to blame "too many laws" for what was actually standard law enforcement against witness tampering.
Kennedy v. Bremerton school district for creative facts.