comment: >
  
  Indeed.
  In an era of YOLO outcome-determinative jurisprudence he at least does have a legal principle theory of law that he sticks to. 
  His institutionalism is appreciated the same way I appreciate Pence for not participating in J6.
context: Four of the justices in the majority — Neil Gorsuch joined the left of the Court in dissent — previously held (at the height of the pandemic’s death toll, no less) that health policies could not restrict religious services. But now that COVID-19 is largely at bay, Justices Thomas, Alito, Kavanaugh and Barrett now think COVID is a fine reason to restrict immigration? The math’s not mathing. That is until you see the through line is current conservative political goals, not any sort of jurisprudential theory.
  
  This can not be overstated. Judges are supposed to be impartial. I understand that true impartiality doesn’t exist but certain SCOTUS judges could at least cut down on the blatant political bias. >
  
  That Gorsuch sided with the liberals is absolutely telling of jiggery-pokery. >
  
  TBH, my impression of Gorsuch is that, while he's a shite human being he still harbours the illusion of being a grand jurist with SCOTUS as a pristine institution.  Yes, he'll twist  facts, etc. in his decisions, but he's still going to try and maintain the vaneer.