Tag Archives: supreme court

Gorsuch Should Be Confirmed Without Nuclear Option

Tomorrow, in the chamber of the Senate, another showdown looms, the confirmation of Judge, Neil Gorsuch. Today, Senate Republicans announced they would invoke the”nuclear option,” to confirm Gorsuch. This rule change will allow Gorsuch to take his seat on The Supreme Court, with just 51 votes instead of the usual 60. There is no question, Gorsuch will be confirmed, but the rules should not have to be amended in order for Gorsuch to ascend to the high court.

In researching Judge Gorsuch’s record, you find that he is an originalist when it comes to constitutional interpretation, meaning he will rule based on the meaning of the constitution not political views. Gorsuch made it clear, he will rule based on precedent and the language of laws. Gorsuch said during his confirmation hearings, “My job is to interpret law not make it”. Are these not the kinds of statements we want from a supreme court justice? The role of the judiciary is to determine constitutionality and use the text of laws in order to render judgement. It is not the purview of the courts to rewrite law based on their personal views or political ideology. Gorsuch has even commented, “I may make rulings I don’t like personally but my personal views aren’t law.” Gorsuch has indicated he will not make any attempt to overturn Roe V. Wade, he has also observed the legalization of gay marriage as “settle law.”

Why then have Democrats indicated they will not support Gorsuch? The answer is simple, pure politics! Senate Democrats are looking for payback after Republicans refused to give Obama nominee, Judge, Merick Garland a vote, following the death of Justice Scalia. The behavior of the GOP was equally as wrong, as the president had the right to nominate a replacement with a year and a half left in his term. By most accounts, Garland and Gorsuch are of the same mold, practicing fidelity to the law.

Senate Democrats should understand that their obstruction could hurt the party’s political future. You would think that the left would understand that a vast majority of the electorate are tired of political games and want Washington to be about the nation’s businesses. If Democrats cannot put their bitterness aside, they may well continue to lose for many elections to come.


Will republican treatment of Garland hurt Gorsuch?

With 18 months left in his term, then President Barack Obama nominated Marrick Gaarland to the Supreme Court, filling the vacancy after Justice Antoni Sacilla’s death. By all accounts, Judge Garland is not an ideologue, and has signed on to conservative opinions when he felt appropriate. Yes, one could certainly assume that Judge Garland is left of center politically, and yes, could have cited with left learning members of the court. Thus, Republicans in the Senate refused to have Garland sit for a hearing, and never gave Garland and up or down vote. Many on the right cited precedent, saying that no Supreme Court nomination has ever been voted on in the final year of a presidency.

While the precedent exists, the constitution does not give a time frame where a president can not nominate a justice to the court. Yet, Republicans refused to allow the Garland nomination to move forward. Now that the Republicans control the White House, will Democrats treat Neil Gorsuch in a similar fashion?  Judge Gorsuch is certainly a conservative jurist, in the mold of Justice Sicilla, and is certainly well qualified to be a Supreme Court Justice. By all accounts, Gorsuch is a strict constitutionalist, and will not make law from the bench, which will be a welcome site to the conservative cause. However, one can certainly speculate rather or not the Democrats will put up a fight, simply out of spite, in an effort to get back at Republicans. Let us make it perfectly clear, not allowing a vote on Garland was wrong, and an affront to democracy, it is the Senate’s job to “advise and consent”, not block because they do not like the person in office. We hope that this nominee will receive a fair hearing, and will be seated on the court soon, unless something disqualifying is found. While, we hope that our politics can become less partisan, and more about the good of the nation, in today’s climate, we certainly can’t bet the house on it.