When President Donald Trump nominated Judge Neil Gorsuch to serve on the Supreme Court, I said that he deserved a fair hearing and a vote. I said this even though Senate Republicans filibustered dozens of President Obama’s judicial nominees and then stopped President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, Judge Merrick Garland. That decision to deny Judge Garland a hearing and a vote had never happened in the history of the U.S. Senate.
Prior to the hearing I laid out the standards I would use to evaluate Judge Gorsuch. I said he needed to demonstrate that he would uphold and defend the Constitution for all Americans, not just for the advantage of corporations and elites. I said he needed to show that he would be an independent check on President Trump and that he would be prepared to disappoint the right-wing special interest groups who handpicked him if the law required it. And I said he needed to answer questions in a forthright manner.
“[Judge Gorsuch] has distorted precedent and cherry-picked text to favor corporations, employers and special interests...”
Judge Gorsuch did none of those things at his hearing. He said he wanted to be evaluated solely based on his past record. So I did. I found that while Judge Gorsuch claims to neutrally follow the text of laws and the original intent of the Constitution, he has distorted precedent and cherry-picked text to favor corporations, employers and special interests over workers, consumers, people with disabilities, and victims of discrimination. Nothing about Judge Gorsuch’s record nor anything he said at his hearing eased my concerns that he has, as White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus said, “the vision of Donald Trump.” Based on a thorough review of his record, I voted no in Committee and will oppose his nomination on the Senate floor.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is claiming that if Senate Democrats don’t approve this Supreme Court nominee in near-record time, we will be responsible for McConnell’s decision to abolish the right for the minority party to filibuster Supreme Court nominees. This is hard to fathom in light of Senator McConnell and his Republican colleagues repeatedly abusing the filibuster for eight years in a non-stop effort to block President Obama from carrying out his agenda.
Senate rules require that a Supreme Court nominee earn 60 votes to end debate on his or her nomination. This rule helps ensure that justices on the high court are not extremists. Every Supreme Court nominee in the past quarter-century showed they could exceed this threshold. Senator McConnell is prepared to abolish this longstanding Senate rule to achieve his partisan goal. He will wear the mantle of responsibility for this unprecedented abuse of power.
