Next <
From: risky biz <>
Subject: Re: When Ginsburg and Thomas BOTH Think You're Wrong...
Full headers:
X-Received: by with SMTP id h12mr26882148qth.60.1514682984852;
Sat, 30 Dec 2017 17:16:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by with SMTP id o193mr3621682vke.9.1514682984585;
Sat, 30 Dec 2017 17:16:24 -0800 (PST)
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2017 17:16:24 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <p292ji$ikr$>
Injection-Info:; posting-host=; posting-account=6E1tdAoAAACWr5r8rFNJ0awN-fczz4Uf
References: <p292ji$ikr$>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: When Ginsburg and Thomas BOTH Think Youre Wrong...
From: risky biz <>
Injection-Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2017 01:16:24 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 53
Print Article
Forward Article
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 2:05:43 PM UTC-8, Clave wrote:
> About 40 minutes after Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch began his 
> second day of testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, all eight 
> of the justices he hopes to join said a major disability decision 
> Gorsuch wrote in 2008 was wrong.
> <...>
> Under Gorsuch’s opinion in Luke P., a school district complies with the 
> law so long as they provide educational benefits that “must merely be 
> ‘more than de minimis.’”
> “De minimis” is a Latin phrase meaning “so minor as to merit disregard.” 
> So Gorsuch essentially concluded that school districts comply with their 
> obligation to disabled students so long as they provide those students 
> with a little more than nothing.
> All eight justices rejected Gorsuch’s approach. IDEA, Chief Justice 
> Roberts wrote, “is markedly more demanding than the ‘merely more than de 
> minimis’ test applied by the Tenth Circuit.” Indeed, Roberts added, 
> Gorsuch’s approach would effectively strip many disabled students of 
> their right to an education.
> <...>
> UPDATE: Shortly after the Supreme Court’s Endrew F. decision came down, 
> Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) asked Gorsuch about his now-discredited 
> decision. Gorsuch defended his approach in Luke P., claiming that he was 
> “bound by circuit precedent.” But Gorsuch is not correct.

The Neil Gorsuch nomination is consistent with everything substantive that Trump has done in office-
serve the craven and exclusive interests of America's wealthiest 3-4% with a few crumbs falling a
little further down the aristocratic hierarchy. Gorsuch is a willing  slave to that ideology.
American aristocrats have far more than enough wealth to care for any disabled children they have
and if anyone in the lower classes doesn't THEY DON'T GIVE A SHIT. Those parents can put their
children outdoors in the cold of winter to freeze to death for all they care. The kicker is that
those latter parents were reduced to their status in the last 30 years or more by the endemic greed
of the former.