That statement would be widely celebrated if it were a minority grandstanding the culture they came from before they were granted passed to the US. If we say diversity isn't our strength, people flip out, but if a person screams black pride of Kenya, people applaud.
I think being accused of asking an inappropriate question in class is different than being accused of being a gang rapist. Their responses were proportional to the accusations.
The tractor WAS a safe vehicle. The trailer was an unsafe vehicle . The law did not say “ motor vehicle”. Gorsuch made a wrong decision; what shows his weakness is his lack of humility and candor to revisit his improper decision and admit his mistake. Too common among judges in general. Just another aristocrat out of touch in his cadillac world.
I can see where you are coming from and personally i would have judged the case different aswell. But i think he is coming from a different point. Problematic with the law that was to be intepreted in this case, was the relativly loose formulation of it: 23:37 "The men is protected and cant be fired if he refuses to operate an unsafe vehicle" Now a few question arise in the rulling: Did he operate the vehicle (aka not refuse to operate the vehicle), which leads to the next question: What is the vehicle that he was operating? Can we interpret the trailer and tractor apart from each other? Because the vehicle to be oprerated was the tractor, since the trailer cant be 'operated', so if he refuses to operate the tractor because the trailer is unsafe, then he is in the right to refuse to drive further. The problem is that the law does not protect him to repair, change, or leave behind the trailer, as Gorsuch pointed out 25:47, if he was allowed to do that he would have ruled differently. The fact that the trucker would have died cannot be be throwed into the judgement, since it is not part of the law. To put everything together: Gorsuch ruled how he ruled because the trucker left behind the trailer, which he wasnt allowed to do, which is why he was legally fired. Just a badly formulated law in my opinion. But still i agree with you that he should have ruled differently or rather that i would have ruled differently but to say that he is out of touch with the world isnt a fair discription and lets the congressmen get to little slack for writting such a bad law in my opinion. Respectfully, just a german kid that likes america a little bit too much
Gorsuch failed to note the whole if he refused to operate the vehicle he would have DIED. Actually it can since we have the right to life! It can be assumed that we have the right to save our sorry ass. 7 other judges ruled that way, this guy, who my guess is pro life, found a way to perverse the law to his own gain. Sadly that's the issue with judicial decisions they are OPINIONS.
@@blubberdink6610 You lay out a very compelling reason as to why Gorsuch correctly interpreted the law, applied it to the facts, and made the right decision. So why do you say you would have decided it differently?
