Michael Bloomberg on Neil Gorsuch confirmation: Don't overplay your hand, Democrats

Michael Bloomberg on Neil Gorsuch confirmation: Don't overplay your hand, Democrats

Michael Bloomberg on Neil Gorsuch confirmation: Don't overplay your hand, Democrats

Former Democratic Gov. Bill Ritter recently co-wrote an op-ed in support of Gorsuch.

The Senate begins confirmation hearings for Neil Gorsuch Monday, and the image to keep in mind is professional wrestling.

"Democrats have failed to demonstrate a strong, unified resistance to this nominee despite the fact that he is an ultra-conservative jurist who will undermine our basic freedoms and threaten the independence of the federal judiciary", they wrote.

"Mr. Anschutz spoke with Senator (Wayne) Allard (of Colorado) about Neil Gorsuch, and Senator Allard suggested that we pass along Mr. Gorsuch's resume to you", Black wrote.

Since Scalia's death the court has been divided equally 4-4 between conservatives and liberals.

Republican Senators managed to hold a Supreme Court seat vacant for over a year, but now they are ready to get down to business.

Progressives frustrated at the judge's stellar record are pressuring Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer to turn the hearings into the next show of political resistance to President Trump. In a.

"I don't think they [Democrats] are going to filibuster", Grassley said.

This argument includes a preposterous New York Times piece headlined "Neil Gorsuch Has Web of Ties to Secretive Colorado Billionaire".

Just four days before Gorsuch appears before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Democratic groups and committees have barely lifted an advertising finger in their quest to sink the nomination. U.S. Sen. Cory Gardner, R-Colo. - who supports his nomination - has been an advocate around Capitol Hill and plans to introduce him when Gorsuch's confirmation hearings start Monday.

While groups involved in campaign finance issues seem to believe they already know Gorsuch's positions, the judge has issued few rulings in this area.

Nevertheless, Obama nominated Judge Merrick Garland, a seemingly uncontroversial pick created to pressure Senate Republicans to cave.

"The qualifications of Judge Gorsuch are beyond dispute".

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. Especially given Gorsuch's Oxford doctorate in legal philosophy, they can get at some deeper jurisprudential or philosophical issues without asking the nominee to either comment on pending cases (like the immigration executive orders) or generate out-of-context fodder for the evening news (anything about Roe v. Wade). Rosen, of the National Constitution Center, who clerked on an appellate court with Gorsuch, said that while Scalia could be "acerbic", Gorsuch was "an incredibly nice guy, warm and friendly". In part, that's because the Trump administration's first several weeks have been an unrelenting fire hose of disaster. As a judge, he repeatedly sided with insurance companies that wanted to deny disability benefits and employers who wanted to cut pension benefits to employees, revealing himself as a staunch backer of corporations and willing accomplice in limiting worker's rights.

As one observer put it: "When the Senate ceases to engage nominees in meaningful discussion of legal issues, the confirmation process takes on an air of vacuity and farce, and the Senate becomes incapable of either properly evaluating nominees or appropriately educating the public". Past year they refused to consider Democratic former president Barack Obama's nominee to fill the vacancy caused by the February 2016 death of conservative justice Antonin Scalia.

For Democrats, the hearing will dredge up bitter feelings. When asked about a particular area of law or case the Supreme Court has decided, the stock answers are, "That case is established precedent", "That issue may come before the Court, so I can not comment at this time" and "Let me give you a lecture about this area of the law" - the equivalent of laughing in the face of the question-asker.

Latest News