| || |
Last edited by Friday13; 3rd April 2017 at 03:54 PM.
Gorsuch should be given an up or down vote. The ABA has rated him "well qualified", it's top rating, and when he was nominated to the appeals court in 2006 he was unanimously approved by republicans and democrats alike.
But democrats have been strategically obstructing republican judge appointments for a long time now. They made history by successfully filibustering a court of appeals appointment for the first time in 2003. After spiking Miguel Estrada they went on to filibuster 9 more appeals court appointees, leading Trent Lott to coin the phrase "nuclear option" as a threat against further democrat obstruction. In 2005 moderate democrats and republicans negotiated a compromise that ended the filibusters on most of the 10 judges in question to avoid "the nuclear option". But democrats under Harry Reid's "leadership" were the ones to first to actually employ the "nuclear option" in 2013, but with the understanding that it wouldn't be applied in the case of SCOTUS appointments. Sorry Harry, you opened up that can of worms.
Gorsuch will be an associate justice on the SCOTUS one way or another. Clearly he's being filibustered for purely partisan reasons by the party that has seen it's minority standing shrink in the last few elections. As Obama said, "elections have consequences."
Meet The Democrats Who Supported Gorsuch In 2006 | The Daily Caller
Bar association gives Gorsuch its best rating - POLITICO
Republicans set the bar for Reid with more Obama judicial filibusters in his first term than all other Presidents suffered in the history of the country combined.
Republicans have no room to whine about anyone obstructing anything, they are the kings of obstruction, they even obstruct themselves....