Let’s cut to the chase here. Gorsuch relied on a broad textual view to reach his conclusion. The dissent relied on a narrow textual view to reach theirs. I don’t think either one is “wrong” per se. it’s just a matter of interpretation.
No, its not. The courts, thru numerous writings, have been instructed to try to figure out what the original law was intended to do.
Mark
That originalist view went out with the horse and buggy era.
No. It "went out" about the time Wilson became president. He gave a speech once where he admitted that there was no place in the Constitution for a liberal or progressive government. So, the left did what they always have done. They changed the rules to advance their agenda.
So, now, instead of law, we have a situation where anyone can interpret what they read to mean something it doesn't. Be careful what you wish for.
Mark