Quote:
Originally Posted by Giantone
|
I am asking this sincerely, do you actually read the links you post?
I ask because you have the sentiment backwards. Gorsuch tried to give a history lesson to Ginsburg and the majority.
quotes from your article
Quote:
|
Ginsburg said the ordinary meaning of “tolled” is to stop the clock. The statute of limitations is suspended while the claims are pending in federal court and for 30 days afterwards. That interpretation, she said, is a “natural fit” with the language of the federal supplemental jurisdiction statute.
|
Quote:
|
Gorsuch, in a dissent joined by justices Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito Jr., accused the majority of abandoning the traditional rule “grown from a rich common law and state statutory tradition” in favor of a new federal rule. The traditional rule, he said, was a 30-day grace period after the claims were dismissed.
|
Quote:
|
Responding to what Ginsburg called Gorsuch’s “history lesson on the ancient common-law principle of ‘journey’s account,’” ...
|
Quote:
He ended his dissent with this final dig at the majority:
“The court today clears away a fence that once marked a basic boundary between federal and state power. Maybe it wasn’t the most vital fence and maybe we’ve just simply forgotten why this particular fence was built in the first place. But maybe, too, we’ve forgotten because we’ve wandered so far from the idea of a federal government of limited and enumerated powers that we’ve begun to lose sight of what it looked like in the first place.”
|
It was an interesting read, I just wonder why your summation is backwards from the article's point.