This message was self-deleted by its author

[Mira]

This message was self-deleted by its author (Mira) on Sun Mar 26, 2017, 10:34 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

[Ligyron]

1. Then why can't someone bring a case before the court addressing this.

Now how would that work...

[Demsrule86]

5. Separation of powers...it can't happen.

[clementine613]

22. What case would you bring?

Are you going to sue in court that Gorsuch is not qualified? Can't do it because there are no qualifications for SCOTUS.

On what grounds would you bring a case where SCOTUS could rule that Gorsuch can't be seated on the court?

[McCamy Taylor]

68. If the Senate goes "nuclear" there will be grounds to sue---and the SCOTUS just indicated

that they will side with the plaintiff in the hypothetical case.

Ding, dong, the Gorsuch nomination is dead.

[bitterross]

70. Um, no, there won't be grounds to sue.

There is Separation of Powers. No court would step in and try to tell the Senate how to run the Senate. The Senate can make just about any rules they wish for running the Senate. No matter how much we dislike them.

[furtheradu]

2. WOW! Goood on the Supremes!

Gonna be an INTERESTING week!

[Ms. Toad]

72. Bad, if they actually did it - mega violation of ethics.

But they didn't. This is a fake news story.

[Demsrule86]

3. Wow...this is extraordinary.

[Ms. Toad]

71. and fake.

[Control-Z]

4. Damn strange times.

Go Supremes!

[Ms. Toad]

74. Fake news.

[Lotusflower70]

6. Wow just wow

Good for them for taking a stand.

[Ms. Toad]

75. Fake news.

[ramblin_dave]

7. Fake news site

Not a reliable source.

[Stallion]

39. Really-with a Deceptive Title

they held that he was wrong in an opinion-they aren't really standing against his nomination. Ex. of Fake Liberal News-we're better than this. Its not "Just in" either-happened several days ago

[BainsBane]

46. It pains me that people fall for this stuff

We are truly fucked as a country.

[grantcart]

73. 50 recs. sigh

[Honeycombe8]

50. Yes...I read it. Looked like a court case DECISION...not a letter against Gorsich nomination.

All lawyers have cases and opinions that are overturned on appeal.

[Ms. Toad]

77. It is a court decision.

It is language from the decision they issued during his hearing.

[UTUSN]

65. Yip, this is about ruling against a decision, not a personal non-endorsement. Echo chamber ThinkProg

Misleading slanted stuff.

[KewlKat]

8. is this for real?

[SCantiGOP]

54. No

It is an exaggerated misrepresentation of the facts.

[PJMcK]

9. This headline is seriously misleading

Please edit it to be more reflective of the judgment made by SCOTUS.

Thank you.

[elleng]

35. Thanks, PJMck.

[Stonepounder]

76. Thanks, PJMcK - When I saw the headline my head almost exploded.

But there is a big extrapolation between SCOTUS overturning Gorsuch 8-0 on a particular case and saying that they 'stand in unison against him, implying that had made some sort of statement.

[dixiegrrrrl]

10. another ray of hope.......

Thank you for this.

[doc03]

11. This sounds big, how can you put a man in the SCOTUS that the entire court opposes nt

[clementine613]

16. Very easily.

The Supreme Court has no say on who sits on it. They cannot appoint or confirm someone to the bench, nor can they reject someone (like the Senate or House can), nor can they remove a sitting Justice.

[doc03]

18. Yes but I think their opinion should pull some weight with those who can nt

[clementine613]

25. It should...

... but ultimately, the President and Senate are completely free to ignore them. They can all say "Choose him/her for the court" or "Don't choose him/her" and the President and Senate are free to listen to them, ignore them completely, or do anything in between.

[Ms. Toad]

78. It's fake news.

The reversed one opinion. They didn't write a letter opposing him.

[Dem2]

12. I don't trust Bipartisan Report

They posted a lot of old/crap on my FB feed during the election.

[Ptah]

13. Bipartisan Report is a pro-liberal, clickbait news outlet,

Bipartisan Report is a pro-liberal, clickbait news outlet, known for creating heavily skewed headlines to appeal to the left.[1] It claims to be "The Internet’s Largest newspaper,"[2] an unsubstantiated claim in conflict with the website's Alexa ranking.[3] It was founded in Seattle, Washington by Justin Brotman, son of Jeff Brotman, who operates the website from his home. Content is written from a heavily biased perspective, and it is said to have posted inaccuracies, pseudoscience and conspiracy theories.[4] Some have classified it as a fake news website,[5] a claim which the website's founder denies. The website reportedly has 15 paid writers, who publish their work under pen names for safety and privacy reasons.[6]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bipartisan_Report

[Hoyt]

57. I'm really tired of fake/skewed "news" from both sides. I've been fact checking on right wing

news for years. Now, I have to do it for all news.

[Sculpin Beauregard]

14. WOO HOO!!!! YES!!!!

[Ms. Toad]

79. Don't get excited. It's fake news.

[Tanuki]

15. The article cited is a sensationalistic rendering of

this level headed piece from Think Progress:


https://thinkprogress.org/while-gorusch-was-testifying-the-supreme-court-unanimously-said-he-was-wrong-33b9ff7eca77#.x1cd2k42e

[bettyellen]

17. Bad source inaccurate headline - please delete or edit

[Honeycombe8]

51. Yes...it should be corrected or deleted. nt

[RedWedge]

19. Reading is fundamental.

This article is from a garbage website that spins already slanted reporting into even more fabulous articles.

[sheshe2]

20. All eight?!

[Bradical79]

32. No

The article isn't true.

[MelissaB]

21. Link to Think Progress which seems to be the article discussed here:

https://thinkprogress.org/while-gorusch-was-testifying-the-supreme-court-unanimously-said-he-was-wrong-33b9ff7eca77#.pcm72mkvb

[dumbcat]

23. Sorry, but I am not believing that

Wishful thinking, but I don't believe it.

[tammywammy]

24. This is a seriously misleading crap headline.

[sl8]

26. Do you find bipartisanreport . com to be a reliable source? n/t

[AJT]

27. Needs corroboration from other news outlets like NYT

or WaPo.

[Panich52]

28. Nice thought, but justices don't have a say & site isn't credible

[BuddyCa]

29. liars

starting with "Just In".

Anyone who wants to know what really happened, ingore the liars at BipartisanReport and go to the ThinkProgress story which is real and which we discussed here at DU four days ago

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141735079/

[Codeine]

30. Bullshit. nt

[Bradical79]

31. Not true

Going by the thinkprogress article this is based on, this is just refering to the publicized SC decision made during his hearing. The one where they contradicted his opinion.

It's a hyperbolic interpretation of something we already knew.

[lapucelle]

33. The story is bogus, and it shouldn't be here.

There is no letter. The Supreme Court overturned one of Gorsuch's ruling. That doesn't mean they think he is unqualified.

And besides, the Supreme Court has no power to reject or accept a nominee.

[elleng]

34. This is foolish if, as appears, it is based on a recent decision reached by the Court,

which is contrary to an opinion of Judge Gorsuch. This is FAKE NEWS.

This is an example of why we HAVE courts, 2 (or more) sides in disagreement; happens every day, MANY times. Judges deal with legal disagreements every day, and the fact that they exist is NO REASON to conclude: 'All 8 Supreme Court Justices Stand In Solidarity Against Trump SCOTUS Pick.' They disagree with him in ONE DECISION.

Where does THIS come from? 'All eight of the current justices agree that President Trump is completely wrong in choosing Neil Gorsuch to fill the ninth seat on the Supreme Court bench?' FAKE NEWS.

[Mira]

36. Sorry - all of you who are objecting to the headline and the source

Just came back and found various levels of displeasure.
I'm not familiar with the source, and got so excited when it was sent to me that I just pasted and posted.
Please forgive me for it and take it with the grain of salt it apparently deserves. Will be more cautious in the future.

These days one simply can't imagine what might be the next shock coming around the bend.

[hrmjustin]

37. No worries.

[Cryptoad]

44. U could delete it!

[Honeycombe8]

52. True dat. nt

[KittyWampus]

55. So delete it or change the title.

[demmiblue]

62. So delete it. n/t

[Crunchy Frog]

63. Could you delete so thread will be locked?

[Amaryllis]

66. I got really excited when I read it too and immediately sent to some friends...from whom

I will no doubt hear back telling me it's not real news...and then I started reading the comments and now feel somewhat foolish. No letter...they apparently just made that part up! But, I am glad to have this community that always goes past alternative facts to real facts.

[furtheradu]

67. Well,shooot! I'm disappointed.

But not in YOU, Mira!

Every day is a lesson in what the HECK! ?!
I think will STILL be an INTERESTING week! ! !

[Ms. Toad]

80. Can you please go back and edit it - or delete it.

We don't need folks from our side seeing the headline, cutting and pasting, and spraeading fake news.

[enough]

38. That headline is extremely misleading. We have so much bullshit to deal with

without adding to the pile.

[Princess Turandot]

40. This is a bizarre characterization of a SCOTUS opinion that was issued last week...

The justices made no comment on Gorsuch whatsoever. They issued an opinion on a case related to education for disabled kids, Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District, finding unanimously for the child involved. The issue in question was similar to that of another case heard by Gorsuch in 2008, in which he reached an opposite conclusion.

That's what happened. There was no rejection of his fitness to be on the Court. And Roberts wrote an opinion, not a 'letter' on the subject.

[BainsBane]

41. This is a blatantly false article

They ruled on a legal decision that overturned a ruling from a lower court that Gorsuch sat on. That is not at all the same as "turning their backs on him" or saying he shouldn't have the seat. They don't do anything like that. Nor do they have a say in it.

This is the worst sort of crap intended to mislead Democrats. That publication generates profits by lying to its readers. Did people learn nothing from the Russian propaganda efforts? People have to learn to see through this stuff if our democracy is to have any hope.

[HoneyBadger]

47. Fake as fake can be

[joanbarnes]

43. Didn't see that coming......

[BainsBane]

45. It isn't coming

the story is a fabrication.

[Equinox Moon]

48. This is BIG.

I hope it makes a difference!

[Ms. Toad]

82. It's fake news.

[Initech]

49. Excellent!!! RESIST!!!!!!

[Ms. Toad]

84. It's fake news.

[spanone]

53. K&R...

[Vinnie From Indy]

56. LOL! This is IN YOUR FACE FAKE NEWS!

It is funny and sad how many Du'ers fell for this bit of BS

[truebluegreen]

58. Not just in, and no stand was taken per se.

But SCOTUS did rule, 8-0, to overturn a Gorsuch opinion. During the hearing, btw. Burn.

[demmiblue]

59. ADMINS... we DO need an option for fake news regarding jury duty!

When I first viewed this thread there were 8 recs, even though several people pointed out that this source/story was bogus.

The OP has not deleted the thread. Now there are 35 recs.

See? This is how fake news spreads. How embarrassing for DU.

[Ms. Toad]

86. I alerted as a conspiracy theory - the closest category to fake news.

Someone else had apparently alerted before me - since it immediatly cleared.

And - the OP has returned, apologized, but not changed the title or deleted the post.

So - I agree.

[procon]

60. Check your discredited source. This isn't a trustworthy website.

Please consider deleting this misleading artificial and don't spread more fake news.

[Chitown Kev]

61. Obvious Fake News is

obvious and fake. News.

[George II]

64. I had to check to make sure this wasn't the Onion. This is unbelievable and probably...

...unprecedented.

The best thing about this is that the Democrats are going to be lauded for voting against this nomination and sending it to defeat.

After the vote, we'll hear from trump that Gorsuch was "Borked" in 1....2.....3........

[Ms. Toad]

85. Not from the onion, but it is fake news.

[Ms. Toad]

69. Stop with the fake news!

These phrases are NOT from a letter - which would be a major violation of judicial ethics.

They are from an opinion that unanimously reversed a lower court ruling.

An opinion says NOTHING about whether they believe he is an appropriate pick for the Supreme court - all says is that they disagree with his interpretation of the law in a single calse..

[onenote]

81. Why is this bullshit posted here?

[pnwmom]

83. No. All 8 Justices recently overturned a single opinion of Gorsuch. That is all -- no letter

about his overall fitness.

The link in the OP links to an article in ThinkProgress which gives an accurate account of the court unanimously overturned a disability education case that Gorsuch had previously ruled on.

[LenaBaby61]

87. Title should be changed...

But all 8 Supremes DID rule against that clown Gorsuch's fucked up 2008 ruling concerning a disabled student while he was testalying before the Senate last week.

https://www.democracynow.org/2017/3/23/headlines/high_court_rules_8_0_against_scotus_nominee_gorsuchs_2008_ruling