Democrats fail to stop Gorsuch
Neil Gorsuch was confirmed to be the next Supreme Court Justice on Friday, April 7.
The previous day, Senate Democrats filibustered the confirmation vote, which forced Senate Republicans under Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to invoke the “nuclear option” that eliminated the 60-vote super-majority for a simple-majority vote of 51 members.
Gorsuch had been a victim of political obstructionism by the Democratic Party, which has become a party of hypocrites and desperate political actors.
Many Democrats became infuriated after Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland, did not receive a confirmation hearing. Senate Republicans invoked the “Biden Rule.” In 1992, Sen. Joe Biden implied that the Senate had the legal authority to not initiate a vote for a Supreme Court nominee during a presidential election.
In that speech, Biden referred to a potential vacancy in the Supreme Court that year. He would clearly not vote for any conservative judge nominated by President George H.W. Bush. Although he has backtracked from that statement, the transcript of his speech showed that he phrased his words in a way that would at least allow for such action in theory.
While no vacancy occurred in 1992, Biden’s statement showed that the Democrats were ready if one did happen and would obstruct the process. Now, the Democrats are complaining that Republicans did an unprecedented move. However, they are simply angry that the Republicans are using a tactic that they had originally threatened to use.
Opposition of Gorsuch’s nomination quickly arose from prominent liberals Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT).
During the Senate Confirmation hearings, Gorsuch faced continuous scrutiny from Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Al Franken (D-MN).
Of those seven senators, four (Schumer, Feinstein, Durbin and Leahy) were in office when Gorsuch was confirmed unanimously in 2006 as a judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth District. They all voiced considerable opposition of Gorduch, calling him unfit and voted against him on April 7.
However, the American Bar Association stated that Gorsuch was “well qualified,” and Merrick Garland received the same rating from the group. The group has been noted by many conservatives as skewing toward the political left. Now that even it has shown that Gorsuch has the necessary qualifications, all claims of him being unfit are completely false.
Those four senators are simply trying to deceive the American public in an attempt to create more political chaos. They simply don’t care about the process or the individual. They only care about winning the next election and will deceive their constituencies in the process.
The remaining three are simply trying to stay politically relevant.
Sanders failed in becoming the Democratic nominee last year and has had several poor media gaffes earlier in the year. One of those was a healthcare debate between he and Ted Cruz (R-TX).
Warren is potentially gearing up for a chance to become her party’s 2020 presidential nominee. However, her approval rating and favorability dropped earlier this year, which may give an opportunity for Republicans to defeat her in a reelection bid.
Franken is simply a minor figure nationally and is still more known for his work on SNL than on the Senate.
By opposing Gorsuch, those three will remain in favor with the party, but they are not in any way helping their constituents. They are more focused on attacking Trump and anything related to him than addressing the needs or opinions of their voters.
These Democratic senators should learn from Joe Donelly (D-IN), Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND) and Joe Manchin (D-WV). They are all up for reelection next year, and all voted for Gorsuch. The Democrats are currently in a vulnerable position.
Lastly, Gorsuch’s legal opinions will be good for the American public.
Despite all the hoopla, Gorsuch’s judicial decisions have resembled that of mainstream Americans. He ruled against campaign limits for write-in candidates that were set at half of those for major party ones. He has defended the death penalty in his legal opinions, which is still an issue that has majority support in the United States.
He is an originalist who believes that the interpretation of the Constitution and laws must be consistent with how a reasonable man during the writing would have interpreted the law to be. Originalism is a view held by the late Antonin Scalia, who is both the judge that Gorsuch is replacing and someone that some Democrats have slightly praised since Trump has been elected.
It is foolish to think , as some Democrats have, that Scalia was a good judge and Gorsuch is a dangerous threat to the American people when they follow the same legal thinking. Gorsuch, the Republican party and Donald Trump have clearly triggered these Democratic senators, and it is enjoyable to see how they have been exposed as crooks.