We now know who Trump’s nominee for SCOTUS is, but what do we know about him–particularly his views on issues concerning indigent defense? On Point has gathered a few links to resources that help answer that question.
Of course, SCOTUSblog has an excellent article on Gorsuch’s background.
The New York Times offers any interesting visual on where Gorsuch might fall on SCOTUS’s liberal-conservative spectrum. They also published this op-ed about him.
The National Review reports:
On criminal law and procedure, Gorsuch has a strong and balanced record. He has protected the privacy rights of Americans while respecting the proper powers of the police. Reversing a lower court, he concluded that when law-enforcement officers open and examine private e-mails, they are engaging in a search governed by the Fourth Amendment. He has argued, in dissent, that a homeowner who posted No Trespassing signs all over her property didn’t consent to police entering her property and knocking on her front door. But he has also explained that the Fourth Amendment must be applied in a manner that “takes a realistic view of human capacities and limitations.”
Gorsuch has complained that the overcriminalization of “so many facets of daily life [means] that prosecutors can almost choose their targets with impunity.” He has insisted that laws and regulations provide clear notice of what is prohibited, and he has prevented police officers from being held personally liable for conduct that wasn’t clearly unlawful.
Like Politico, a number of sources say he is pretty much Scalia 2.0.
USA Today makes the case both for and against Gorsuch.
And Slate dives deep into Gorsuch’s track record on criminal justice issues.