misfitS pOLITICS

We talk. We write. We entertain. Or so we think.
  • Home
  • Home

Theater of the Absurd

3/24/2017

3 Comments

 
Mo
One of the more irritating rituals in our fine Republic is the SCOTUS Senate hearing process. I realize I might be in the minority here, but it strikes me as a rather absurd exercise in theater, in which Senators posture and grandstand over their pet issues while the nominee sits for hours patiently listening to the Senator blather, then answering or avoiding questions usually designed to trap the nominee into saying something damaging. The theory is these hearings provide the public an opportunity to hear directly from the nominee about his judicial philosophy, but in reality, nothing terribly useful comes from these hearings, other than a reminder that we’re governed by a pack of buffoons and lunatics.

Speaking of buffoons, did you see Al Franken’s performance during the Gorsuch hearings? It’s a perfect example of this Theater of the Absurd. Franken spent the better part of six minutes rambling on and on about various Democrat grievances, including Merrick Garland, before Gorsuch was allowed to respond. But Franken started his diatribe with a discussion of Gorsuch's dissent in the infamous “Trucker” case,
TransAm Trucking, Inc. v. Administrative Review Board.

Here’s what happened in that case: A truck driver working for TransAm was stranded on the side of the road in winter when the brakes on his trailer froze. He called TransAm for help and was instructed to wait there for help to arrive. He spent a few hours waiting but his heater malfunctioned and he became very cold. At that point, having called dispatch again and told to keep waiting, he decided to unhitch his cab from the trailer and drive to the nearest gas station. TransAm later fired him for disobeying orders and abandoning his goods.

The sole question in the case before the 10
th Circuit was whether the trucker “refused to operate” a vehicle out of safety concerns. If so, under the Surface Transportation Assistance Act, he was wrongfully discharged. The Labor Department, which is the agency in charge of administering the STAA, decided that the trucker “refused to operate” the truck out of safety concerns, despite the fact that TransAm instructed him NOT to operate the truck and he, in fact, DID operate the truck against TransAm’s instructions.

I’ve written
about the Chevron doctrine before here, but the basic gist is this: If the statute at issue, here the STAA, is ambiguous on its face, the court is supposed to defer to an agency’s reasonable interpretation of the statute. The majority of the court decided that the phrase “refused to operate” was ambiguous and deferred to the Labor Department’s interpretation. Judge Gorsuch wrote a dissent, in which he pointed out, quite reasonably, that under the plain meaning of the phrase “refused to operate,” the trucker did not refuse to operate the truck out of safety concerns but, instead, refused to NOT operate the truck, and did so against his employer’s explicit instructions.

Now, this case is a picture perfect example of one of the problems with the Chevron doctrine. Courts will often bend over backwards to find statutory language ambiguous and then defer to the agency’s interpretation. This effectively delegates the court’s authority to interpret statutes to the agency. The theory behind Chevron is that the agency supposedly has the expertise to deal with the particular area it administers. But this ignores the fact that the court has the expertise to interpret statutes. It’s that activity—statutory interpretation—that is delegated to the agency under Chevron.

In any event, Al Franken and all sorts of other characters on the Left are up in arms about the result under Gorsuch’s dissent that the trucker could be fired for not wanting to freeze “to death!” waiting for help. So, Franken went off during the Gorsuch hearing in a rather pathetic attempt to out-legal the esteemed judge.

Franken didn’t even try to justify the majority’s view that “refused to operate” encompasses a refusal to not operate. Instead, he tried absurdity, which is to be fair one of his specialties, but here not in the way he thinks. Because, in the Left’s view, results of lawsuits are all that matter, Franken tried to argue that the plain language of a statute can be disregarded when it produces an absurd result, such as a trucker getting fired for refusing to freeze to death.

In Franken’s shining, Perry Mason moment, he declared: “I had a career in identifying absurdity and I know it when I see it.” The problem is, as Gorsuch explained, under the law a court can only apply this “absurdity doctrine” to disregard the plain meaning of a statute in cases where there is a typo or “scrivener’s error,” and not when the court simply disagrees with a policy. To which the Senator from Minnesota responded, “When there’s a scribner there?” “No,” Gorsuch replied, “a scrivener’s error.”


At this point, anyone with half a brain would be shaking his head at Franken’s absurdity. But in the Left’s Theater of the Absurd, Franken is a hero for acting as if the law is merely a plaything one manipulates to achieve the desired result, and that courts are allowed to disregard the law when the result would be undesirable. For the rest of us, I think we know absurdity when we see it, Senator Franken.
3 Comments
Jordan
3/24/2017 10:13:23 pm

Agree Franken is a national embarrassment.
Agree confirmation hearings are mostly posturing, like all else in D.C.
But on this particular opinion, I could see 'operate' = being in the state of controlling the function of. I am in the state or condition of operating a vehicle, So I (Drive or Not Drive) as appropriate and reasonable as long as I am in the state of operating the vehicle. Safety concern = Freezing to death. Refuse to operate due to safety = Refuse to Not Drive due to Freezing to death.

Reply
Herr Morgenholz
3/25/2017 05:43:19 am

Hey. At least we were spared any Borking or pubic hairs this round!

Reply
Mark
3/25/2017 06:29:32 am

It is certainly a Theater of the Absurd when leftists speak in dissent of Constitutional nominees, however, I must admit I do enjoy listening to that rare moment when a rare breed of GOP politician outclasses a leftist nominee in that forum. Agreed it is always dog and pony, there is no effect, no matter how good (or bad) the speeches are, to the nomination (or not) of the candidate.
As to the trucker case, the trucker has the right to leave, but the company has the right to fire. Not the job of Gov't or courts to determine the hiring and firing practices of private companies. But I am a naive Constitutionalst wishing for better days and a return to laws that are enforced and above all protect freedom...

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Misfits

    Just a gaggle of people from all over who have similar interests and loud opinions mixed with a dose of humor. We met on Twitter.
    ​Enough said.

    (If that's not enough, you can learn more here)

    Tweets by misfitspolitics

    Archives

    January 2024
    November 2023
    December 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    January 2021
    September 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016

    Categories

    All
    2016
    9/11
    Abortion
    AFB
    Afghanistan
    Air Force
    #alfieevans
    Alfie Evans
    ALS
    Armed Forces
    Army
    Baby
    Ben Carson
    Bernie
    Blog
    Bosnia
    CAOC
    #CelebrateWomen
    Christie
    City Council
    Comey
    Cooking
    Crete
    Cruz
    Deep Fry
    Desert Storm
    Donald Trump
    Drug Companies
    Election
    England
    Europe
    Exclusivity
    F-16
    Fanfic
    Fayetteville
    FBI
    FDA
    Fiction
    Fire
    Florida
    Free Market
    Fun
    Germany
    Gilmore
    Government
    Health Care
    Hillary Clinton
    Hobby
    Iraq
    Italy
    John Kasich
    Kevin Williamson
    Korea
    Kuwait
    LANTIRN
    Life
    Local Politics
    Marco Rubio
    Medical Care
    Memoir
    Military
    MIsfitMemo
    #MisfitMemo
    Misfits
    Misfits Politics
    Moms
    Mother's Day
    Narrative
    National Review
    NATO
    Navy
    #NeverTrump
    Patent
    Pharmaceutical
    Philippines
    Phillippines
    Politics
    Raymond
    Reform
    Rex
    Rubio
    Scarcity
    September 11th
    Service
    Ted Cruz
    Thread
    Tweetstorm
    Twitter
    UK
    Water
    Weekly Rewind
    World Cup
    World Trade Center

    RSS Feed

Home

About

Contact​

Copyright © 2016
  MisfitsPolitics
  • Home
  • Home