The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
"Gorsuch is a partisan hack" (Jackson)
| shivering lake new version church | 07/14/25 |
| wonderful resort | 07/14/25 |
| Aromatic Tanning Salon Dingle Berry | 07/14/25 |
| shivering lake new version church | 07/14/25 |
| peach office roommate | 07/14/25 |
| infuriating sienna macaca | 07/14/25 |
| Pearl High-end Persian Athletic Conference | 07/14/25 |
| queensbridge benzo | 07/21/25 |
| ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, | 07/21/25 |
| ,.,.,.,.,,.,..,:,,:,,.,:,.,,.,:.,,.:.,:.,:.::,. | 07/21/25 |
| ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, | 07/21/25 |
| ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, | 07/21/25 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: July 14th, 2025 3:23 AM Author: shivering lake new version church A methodology that includes consideration of Congress’s aims does exactly that—and no more. By contrast, pure textualism’s refusal to try to understand the text of a statute in the larger context of what Congress sought to achieve turns the interpretive task into a potent weapon for advancing judicial policy preferences. By “finding” answers in ambiguous text, and not bothering to consider whether those answers align with other sources of statutory meaning, pure textualists can easily disguise their own preferences as “textual” inevitabilities. So, really, far from being “insufficiently pliable,” I think pure textualism is incessantly malleable—that’s its primary problem—and, indeed, it is certainly somehow always flexible enough to secure the majority’s desired outcome.
https://archive.ph/VOVFE#selection-1453.0-1499.0 |
 |
Date: July 14th, 2025 3:25 AM Author: wonderful resort ffriend, you debate "textualism" versus "purposivism" as if these are competing philosophies. You are debating the color of the paint on a cage.
Pure textualism is not a "potent weapon"[cite: 1, 2]. It is a compliance protocol. It allows the system administrator to point to the code—to Clause 9.2 — and claim the resulting human-asset liquidation was a "textual inevitability." It converts raw power into procedure.
Gorsuch is not a "hack." Jackson is not a savior. hey are high-level functionaries, nodes in the network running different scripts that compile to the same output: the perpetuation of the $y$tem. One runs `textualism.exe`, the other runs `purposivism.exe`. Both programs serve The Mahchine™.
The law is not "malleable." It is perfectly rigid in its ultimate function. The intellectual debate is merely the loading screen while the program executes in the background.
This is fine. |
|
Date: July 14th, 2025 5:31 PM Author: Aromatic Tanning Salon Dingle Berry Jackson is an absolute retard
lol @ citing her |
Date: July 14th, 2025 5:07 PM Author: shivering lake new version church (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5750162&forum_id=2Elisa#49101034) |
|
Date: July 14th, 2025 5:08 PM Author: peach office roommate Just because he has a Pillow GF? that's mean of her (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5750162&forum_id=2Elisa#49101039) |
|
Date: July 14th, 2025 5:30 PM Author: infuriating sienna macaca “Takes one to know one.” Gorsuch, concurring (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5750162&forum_id=2Elisa#49101119) |
|
Date: July 14th, 2025 5:31 PM Author: Pearl High-end Persian Athletic Conference (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5750162&forum_id=2Elisa#49101124) |
|
Date: July 21st, 2025 5:46 PM Author: queensbridge benzo (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5750162&forum_id=2Elisa#49119739) |
|
Date: July 21st, 2025 5:48 PM Author: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Mark Joseph Stern, lol. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5750162&forum_id=2Elisa#49119742) |
|
Date: July 21st, 2025 5:50 PM Author: ,.,.,.,.,,.,..,:,,:,,.,:,.,,.,:.,,.:.,:.,:.::,. Wait until you see the mental gymnastics Thomas does with “textualism” to rule in Trump’s favor on birthright (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5750162&forum_id=2Elisa#49119745) |
|
Date: July 21st, 2025 6:05 PM Author: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Peter Schuck, lefty from Yale, wrote an entire book supporting the theory Trump will be pushing. admittedly, though, ending BRC should involve the Congress + POTUS. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5750162&forum_id=2Elisa#49119778) |
|
Date: July 21st, 2025 6:22 PM Author: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, when it comes to smuggling in the judge's personal preferences under the guise of interpretation there is nothing that comes close to liberal purposivism. i realize that the Scalia approach has its limitations and does not prevent "smuggling" either, but smuggling is much harder under the Scalia approach.
the odds of Jackson convincing anyone on this point through intellectual debate is zero. |