It appears likely that appeals court Judge Neil Gorsuch is going to be the replacement for the late Antonin Scalia, bringing the Supreme Court back to its full complement of nine members. Democrats have to oppose him in the confirmation
It appears likely that appeals court Judge Neil Gorsuch is going to be the replacement for the late Antonin Scalia, bringing the Supreme Court back to its full complement of nine members. Democrats have to oppose him in the confirmation hearings — their base will accept no less — but their hearts really aren’t in it. There appears to be no scandal or hidden secrets attached to the man, and his large body of judicial opinions contains nothing outrageous. Furthermore, he seems to be a prince. Attacking him too strongly would make the Democrats appear mean-spirited, which would make it tougher to partake in their favorite indulgence, calling Republicans the mean-spirited ones. If it has to, the GOP can go nuclear and get the judge approved by a simple majority — Democrats set the precedent.
And there’s a long-term reason for Democrats to hold back. If Gorsuch is approved, he would just return the court to the status quo ante, four members who vote liberal, four who vote conservative, and Anthony Kennedy, who is likely to side with either one depending on which side of the bed he got out of. The next Supreme Court vacancy — and it is highly likely President Trump will see another one — is the one that could cement the court’s conservatism for a generation. That’s the fight Democrats have to save themselves for.
Of course, that’s assuming Gorsuch is as conservative as he is purported to be. Justices have a funny way of finding their own unique visions of the law and the Constitution, and presidents aren’t always pleased with the results. It is fair to label Gorsuch an originalist like Scalia, but he also believes in something called the “moral reading view” of the law. It doesn’t make him a “living Constitution” jurist, but it is a way of looking at the law beyond the black-and-white of the words on paper.
One quality that Gorsuch would bring to the court is something the American people really need: a habit of writing his legal opinions in clear, concise, even memorable English, not in the dense legalese most judges seem most comfortable with. If we are to have meaningful debates about the law and the courts and how the Constitution should protect us — and heaven knows we should — we have to first understand what the issues are. Justice Neil Gorsuch could help us a great deal with that.
— The News-Sentinel (Fort Wayne, Ind.)
