Corsair wrote:In 2002, Gorsuch penned an op-ed criticizing the Senate for delaying the nomination of Merrick Garland to the DC Court of Appeals writing that "the most impressive judicial nominees are grossly mistreated".
Gorsuch is going to get confirmed, Dems don't have the power to prevent it. Filibustering is a half measure that can be stopped using a tool they created. Imo it won't even come to that, sure there will be some opposition and politics involved.
I don't see any benefit of the Democrats capitulating to the right and allowing Gorsuch in. The Republicans will use the filibuster either this time, or the next time they nominate a Supreme Court seat. And lets not pretend that the GOP will ever allow another Democrat to nominate a SCJ as long as they have a majority, they flat out refused to fill the chair if Hillary were to be elected.
We've come to a point where the Dems need to fight back. We aren't playing by the same rules anymore. This isn't obstruction for obstructions sake. The game changed when the GOP stole a seat from Obama. Any nominee that comes after that point is illegitimate.
DreadNaught wrote:However Gorsuch is guy Dems previously approved and will do well in the hearings.
So was Merrick Garland, so I'm not going to give that viewpoint much credence.
Either way, Gorsuch is a loyal Republican operative. If he were the neutral, bipartisan, sterling judge he’s supposed to be, he would never have accepted Trump's invitation to usurp another neutral, bipartisan, sterling judge. If he deserves to be on the court, he deserves to be on the court by a 52-48 party-line vote, held over the death of the filibuster. Every decision he signs will come with an “R” next to his name. That’s the job he chose, and that’s the job he’ll get. He will forever live in history as the first illegitimate SCJ on the bench.