Democrats threaten delay on Supreme Court nominee
- Author: Larry Hoffman Apr 02, 2017,
Apr 02, 2017, 17:35
On Thursday, as committee hearings on Judge Neil Gorsuch wrapped up, Senate Democrats said they would filibuster Gorsuch's nomination to the Supreme Court.
Casey said he was unaware of any discussions among Democrats about a deal to advance Gorsuch's nomination in return for a guarantee from Republicans that the next Supreme Court nomination would need 60 votes to proceed to a Senate confirmation vote.
There are now 52 Republicans, 46 Democrats and two Independents, who caucus with the Democrats, in the Senate.
U.S. Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa., says he can not support Judge Neil Gorsuch for Supreme Court justice. The maneuver, called a filibuster, could temporarily stymie the nomination, as Republicans control only 52 seats in the Senate, eight short of the 60-vote threshold. Gorsuch, an appeals court judge on the Denver-based 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, should easily win approval of the GOP-dominated committee, after which his confirmation moves to the Senate floor.
"If my Democratic colleagues choose to filibuster this guy, then they will be telling me that they don't accept the election results - 306 electoral votes - that they're trying to delegitimize President Trump", Graham continued. We would not be here if Republicans weren't treating the Supreme Court like a partisan get out the vote tool, or perhaps an offer to Russian Federation tool, which is by extension, it seems, a Republican get out the vote tool. Specifically, these Democrats hoped to give Gorsuch their blessing "in exchange for a commitment from Republicans not to kill the filibuster for a subsequent vacancy during President Donald Trump's term".
"If this nominee can not earn 60 votes - a bar met by each of President Obama's nominees, and George Bush's last two nominees - the answer isn't to change the rules", Schumer said, imploring McConnell not to hit the nuclear switch. "It's to change the nominee", Schumer said.
Face it: If partisanship and ideology were not central to Supreme Court nominations, Gorsuch would be looking at more years in his beloved Colorado.
The best scholarship shows an increasingly tight fit between the party of the appointing president and how a judge rules. This seat, vacated when Justice Antonin Scalia died, was never Republicans to fill, so don't let them, the argument goes.
"Gorsuch will be confirmed,"he said on Wednesday".
Democrats are getting a lot of pressure from their base to vote no on Gorsuch in part because of the way Republicans treated Garland. Kirsten Gillibrand - who have said they'll oppose Gorsuch. But Degan acknowledged that her team did not review materials released by the Justice Department covering Gorsuch's involvement with Bush administration controversies involving the interrogation and treatment of terrorism detainees, broad assertions of executive power and warrantless eavesdropping on people within the United States.
The committee also heard a highly personal account directly from Jeff Perkins, the father of a child with autism whom Gorsuch ruled against in 2008. Democrats expressed frustration about his refusal to answer questions on whether Supreme Court rulings favoring abortion, contraception and gay rights were correctly decided. "This should not be a partisan issue", Jaffer said.