Our next Supreme Court Justice. Excellent choice. Kudos, President Trump.
Gorsuch has the typical pedigree of a high court justice. He graduated from Columbia, Harvard and Oxford, clerked for two Supreme Court justices and did a stint at the Department of Justice.
He attended Harvard Law with former President Barack Obama. On Tuesday, Obama’s former ethics czar, Norm Eisen, another classmate, tweeted: “Hearing rumors Trump’s likely Supreme Court pick is Neil Gorsuch, my (and President Obama’s!) 1991 Harvard Law classmate.If so, a great guy!”
Since 2006, he has served on the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, in Colorado. His supporters note that he is an outdoorsman who fishes, hunts and skis. On the court, conservatives hope he could become the intellectual heir to Scalia, long the outspoken leader of the conservative bloc.
“The real appeal of Gorsuch nomination is he’s likely to be the most effective conservative nominee in terms of winning over Anthony Kennedy and forging conservative decisions on the court,” said Jeffrey Rosen of the National Constitution Center. “He’s unusual for his memorable writing style, the depth of his reading and his willingness to rethink constitutional principles from the ground up. Like Justice Scalia, he sometimes reaches results that favor liberals when he thinks the history or text of the Constitution or the law require it, especially in areas like criminal law or the rights of religious minorities, but unlike Scalia he’s less willing to defer to regulations and might be more willing to second-guess Trump’s regulatory decision.”
Let the confirmation battle be joined.
Hopefully there’ll be no hearings until the next election so we can let the people decide.
Wow, excellent choice indeed!
Two words: nuclear option…thanks Harry Reid!
Wait until the next election?
Sen Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in 2007 that President George W. Bush shouldn’t get to pick any more Supreme Court justices. 19 months before the next president was inaugurated.
In 2004, Schumer said he would do everything in his power to stop Bush from elevating Charles Pickering to a federal appeals court in 2004.
Then-Senator Barack Obama said in 2006 that he supported the Democratic-led filibuster to stop Justice Samuel Alito from making it to the Supreme Court.
Sen Kennedy led a gang of eight senators in 2003 to block Bush nominee Miguel Estrada from rising to the Court of Appeals.
But have the Democrats ever refused to have hearings for a Supreme Court nominee?
Besides, I was being sarcastic. Obama’s nominee deserves a hearing just as Trump’s nominee deserves a hearing.
I don’t think the D’s should follow the R’s example and be a party of obstruction. At some point in our elected representatives in Washington need to start acting like adults.
Point of conversation. If Obama would have nominated Gorsuch, would Senate have held hearings/voted to confirm?? I think yes. I’ve seen a lot of Dem’s saying this was a “stolen” appointment. I disagree. Obama always had the opportunity to nominate a candidate that the Republican Senate could accept. Garland obviously was not that candidate. So why waste time with the hearings? Does it go against etiquette, yes, probably. But the opposite party controlled the Senate, it is their prerogative. And the elections showed they were not penalized/rewarded for that. Considering the contentious relationship between Congress and Pres. Obama, none of what happened should be surprising, especially considering the shift in judicial philosophy that this particular appointment by Obama would have caused.
The Republicans in the Senate flat-out said they would not hold hearings to confirm anyone, period, until after Obama was out of office. Funny how that story is now changing and morphing into something else…