Democrats preview line of attack on high court nominee

Share

A confirmation hearing with no sparks and no controversy is a surefire path to a seat on the court.

And the hostility which Trump and his administration have shown towards immigrants and rational immigration policy demands a commitment to judicial independence that Gorsuch has shown no signs of bringing to the job.

The conservative Judicial Crisis Network alone has budgeted $10 million for the fight, aimed principally at 10 states Trump carried in the 2016 election and where Democratic senators will face re-election contests next year.

At the same time, his extensive paper trail is largely devoid of significant decisions involving the hot-button social issues that can galvanize politicians and advocacy groups, including affirmative action and gun rights.

Indeed, Gorsuch has won the endorsement of Scalia's widow, Maureen, who was a guest in the East Room as his name was announced.

Conservative legal activists who support the nomination say that Democrats are cherry-picking a small number of rulings that distort Gorsuch's 11-year record as a judge.

Champoux expects the confirmation hearings to be tough.

"He expresses a lot of empathy and sympathy for the less powerful", Schumer said, "but when it comes to time to rule, when the chips are down, far too often he sides with the powerful few over everyday Americans just trying to get a fair shake".

That theme is echoed in ads paid for by liberal groups ranging from the Alliance for Justice to People for the American Way. Of particular interest to many will be how Senate Democrats interact with the nominee.

Knowing that, Republican Sen.

During the March 14 press call, Whitehouse said Senate Democrats are concerned that the Supreme Court majority has become a "tool of the Republican Party" to preserve power for Republican candidates and corporations.

Will they? Will Senate Democrats impede the process? Chairman Grassley will open, followed by ranking member Feinstein, and then alternating back and forth between Republicans and Democrats-Hatch, Leahy, Graham, Durbin, Cornyn, Whitehouse, Lee, Klobuchar, Cruz, Franken, Sasse, Coons, Flake, Blumenthal, Crapo, Hirono-and then finishing with the two most junior Republicans on the committee, Tillis and Kennedy. Others, like Obama nominee Sonia Sotomayor and George W. Bush nominee Samuel Alito, almost bored their inquisitors to death with repetitive answers that said as little as possible. The judge's ruling extended the Supreme Court's holding in Citizens United in favor of "corporate personhood", according to critics.

After his clerkship and a stint in private practice, Gorsuch served as a principal deputy associate attorney general in the Justice Department beginning in 2005.

Party sources say Democratic senators will focus much of their attention on seeking Gorsuch's views on abortion, since he has not ruled directly on the right to the procedure.

Senate Democrats should use the hearings as an opportunity to highlight why antitrust matters and what Judge Gorsuch would do to magnify the law.

"Those are the big issues that are likely to come before the Supreme Court with regards to the Second Amendment", Winkler said. That almost year-long political stall, she suggests, should be the basis for evaluating the Republican nominee.

The majority held that a local government could seize private property for the objective of private redevelopment under the "takings clause" clause of the Constitution.

First, I say reject Gorsuch because of the way the Senate Republicans handled the Merrick Garland nomination.

"We wish to call to your attention the following aspects of Judge Gorsuch's record and philosophy that are of particular concern to our organizations and our constituents, and that raise crucial questions of grave effect to LGBT people, everyone living with HIV, and anyone who cares about these communities". Article III of the Constitution established the lifetime appointment of Supreme Court justices, but Article II granted a gatekeeper role for the political branch through the "advice and consent" of the Senate.

But that sort of strategic decision-making is hard at a time when the Democratic base doesn't see any benefit to cooperating with Trump.

Share

Advertisement

© 2015 Leader Call. All Rights reserved.