Neil Gorsuch: Everything You Need to Know. Q&A with Randy Barnett

[@multiverse7797]

Great Q and A. Randy was a good guest. Very interesting discussions.

[@howardwhite9773]

absolutely love the Rolling Stones quote!! Good on ya, Mr. Barnett (and yes, I bought your book).

[@nrxzionistlibertarian6168]

Finally, some libertarian content after all this marxist-minded, exaggerated Trump bashing.

[@hus390]

You lost me in "Libertarian". Saying you are a Libertarian, is like saying I'm an idiot child. Libertarianism is a failed dogma. No one even entertain this idiocy. This is why Libertarian Party fails miserably. The Constitution is well balanced the relationship between the state/government and the people. Things like eminent domain, taxation and general welfare are enshrined in the Constitution to ensure that people can run the government to advance the greater good of the nation. Libertariansim is dogmatic extreme individualist nonsense with pipe-dream ideas. There will be no liberty without laws that protects the people. As Hitchens once said libertarian ism was not prescriptive.. it was only something whose impulses could be followed after institutions had already been built and the hard work had already been done. Not very useful. Most of Libertarians are atheists or agnostics. Because libertarianism is their civic religion, just like wacko environmentalist tree hungers.

[@mattcomchoc2957]

a million thumbs up. makes me wonder about whether there is some divide at reason.

[@joeyflubbermuffin7227]

indeed, atletico ATM. Everything not explicitly anti-Marxist will become Marxist. Libertarianism as a word, a movement, and an ideology is lost to us. It is a failure.

[@thomaswilburn6263]

>Nrx Zionist Libertarian do you smoke crack?

[@gi169]

Come on ReasonTV get it together. You can do it.

[@UTubekookdetector]

10:13-11:05 And that my friends is the money-line! Gorsuch seems to be an enemy of the Administrative State/Administrative Law and that's a good thing!

[@jimstiles26287]

I like videos that feature Randy Barnett.

[@AKlover]

From what this guy is saying I like Gorsuch as a pick and I am gaining a bit more respect for Trump.

[@SourPatchLyds]

Gorsuch was a huge win for Trump. Yuuuugggggeeeee.

[@admthrawnuru]

His deference to Mattis on the torture thing was even more encouraging, imo. Once he get's past his initial flurry of executive actions and gets some trade policy settled, he may indeed end up being a serviceable albeit protectionist president.

[@AKlover]

ObamaCare repeal, tax reform, and destroyin things like the education and media establishment where the left dominate will be what defines him. 6 months down the road 98% of America's dumbasses will not know who Gorsuch is or why he is relevant.

[@x2f01mick]

AKlover trebling the deficit will define him.

[@x2f01mick]

AKlover sorry I meant trebling the debt in four years will define him.

[@CaryHawkins]

I don't understand why libertarians are largely pro-choice because the right to life seems to trump the right to your body. If any of my rights gets in the way of someone else's right to life, it is overruled by that other person's right to life. I can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater for instance. Life > Speech. So, in essence Life > Body or any other reason I've seen to support abortion. Plus, all the evidence points towards the unborn child or fetus being alive, human, and innocent or undeserving of death. Any pro-choicers have any good arguments? I've yet to find a good argument for pro-choice. For me, you'd have to show that the unborn child is either not human, not alive, or not innocent, and I don't see how anyone can do that.

[@CrusaderLogan]

Well speech is different than actual physical subjects. I'm not pro-choice, but the free speech comparison isn't a good one to understand the subject.

[@sonictech1000]

The "practical" pro life argument in terms of the proper law is that if there is going to be some arbitrary point at which a fetus becomes a baby and even then there will be some arbitrary conditions under which she is allowed to kill the baby then WHO has the greatest authority to decide these things, the mother or a bunch of strangers? Clearly the mother has a greater ownership right in both her body and the fetus within it than anybody else. Another approach is that rights are inseparable from the ability to understand and respect the rights of others. For example, a Libertarian believes that it's wrong to murder but that it is acceptable to kill, if necessary, in self defense. Why? One reason is that the person trying to murder you has, for that moment at least, given up their right not to be killed by refusing to respect your right not to be killed. This essentially means that even if the fetus is a "life" it is still the property of the mother. BTW, the "you can't shout fire in a crowded theater" comes from the footnotes of a Supreme Court decision where the court decided that producing leaflets denouncing the draft were not protected speech.

[@CaryHawkins]

I don't agree with your assertion that the mother owns the fetus like property. What's the evidence for that claim?

[@sonictech1000]

Cary Hawkins If not the mother then who? It seems like she has a greater claim on the fetus than anyone else.

[@CaryHawkins]

No one?

[@ShinkleGunDog]

Fantastic interview!

[@healthhavencom]

Nick is awesome. Love Reason

[@nateo200]

5 years later Gorsuch is the man with Due Process and vague laws risk, Separation of powers, textualism, etc.

[@seantripp6028]

Conclusion - "We really don't know"...

[@mmille10]

Revisiting this after seeing what Merrick Garland has done as AG, and I hear Barnett call him "Imminently qualified" for the Supreme Court. I'm thinking no, he's not. He's in the process of authorizing actions that would horrify a constitutional scholar.

[@RAXTSFK]

The bongos! love it.

[@Tasadaru]

Judge Andrew Napoalitano counseled President Trump about the Supreme Court a few times. That is why Trump's pick is no surprise.

[@edictzero]

It's bizarre to me that a consideration for a supreme Court Judge is whether or not they will strike down an unconstitutional law if it is popular. Isn't that their primary duty? Why not put a cinder block on the bench and pass every law a president signs if that is a factor

[@islanders1329fan]

What gorsuch did to the frozen truck driver is proof enough that he’s a bad guy. Ruling against an autistic child is also a cruelty ruling. Favoring corporations and opposing a woman’s right to an abortion etc proves enough he’s not the kind of textualist he enjoys making himself out to be. He’s a mean cruel judge

[@7armedman]

Libertarians know everything, or so say Libertarians. Maybe one day they're be smart enough to learn how to win a fucking election.

[@vincentadultman8527]

John Roberts lacks courage. GTFO here with that twisted ACA logic.

[@phoenixwing50]

Vincent Adultman I still do not understand that vote.

[@vincentadultman8527]

phoenixwing50 he acted like a political animal. He knew that overturning the sitting President's signature legislation 2 months before the election would have thrown it for Romney. It would have been an almost unprecedented rebuke of a President. But he had to torture logic to put it back into the electorate's and Congress's hands. He punted on the biggest of issues, hoping someone else will solve the problem for him. Like it or not, it will be his lasting legacy. He's a Chief Justice with no courage and his tenure will be viewed as inefficacious.

[@harrisontamayo401]

Did this man just say he hasn't seen any unconstitutional activity from trump?!?

[@jaysonwestbrook312]

any truth or context to the "Fascism Forever" flap?

[@Paul-A01]

Jayson Westbrook Even if it is true, sounds like a satirical name.

[@liberdedeum6748]

+amdg+ sounds like some catholic teaching on culpability is part of his mindset +pax Christi!+