A vote on the nomination of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court of the United States is expected today in the United States Senate. Democrats are expected to oppose it and not enough votes in favor are anticipated to override a filibuster. Republicans are expected to “go nuclear” and change the rules so that he can be confirmed by a simple majority.
What should happen?
- Neil Gorsuch is acceptable on his merits and should be confirmed. Democrats should return to the old standard which is that any competent candidate should be confirmed and vote to confirm.
- Gorsuch is as good as any candidate Democrats are likely to see from this administration. Democrats should allow him to be confirmed, i.e. should not filibuster.
- Republicans should not “go nuclear”. If they don’t have the votes to override they should let the nomination go down.
- Republicans should “go nuclear”.
- Democrats should oppose the Gorsuch nomination to teach Republicans a lesson. Republicans should not “go nuclear”. Democrats should then return to the old standard.
- Judge Gorsuch should withdraw his nomination and a consensus candidate should be put up in his place. Democrats should vote to confirm this consensus candidate. Please name names. Who would be such a consensus candidate?
- No consensus candidate is possible.
- We should just continue with the present roster of Supreme Court justices until the end of Trump’s first or even second term.
For Democrats, someone invent a time machine to go back to 2013 and tell senate democrats to not go nuclear.
Sometimes everyone has to live with the consequences of their actions. I am sure soon enough the tables will be turned on the republicans and they too will have a nominee shoved down their throats.
Gorsush sounds like he’s as good a nominee to expect from any republican administration.
During the presidency of GWB the Dems refused to approve some of his federal court nominations. I guess upholding nominations was ok for the Dems when they were the ones obstructing. However, when the Rs refused to approve some of Obama’s federal court nominations the Dems went nuclear (without much thought) under Reid, and were able to place some very liberal jurists on the privotal DC Circuit court.
During the final years of Bush’s presidency prominent Dems (Biden & Schumer) decried any SCOTUS appointments be made in those last 18 months of the opposition party’s term of office. However, that all changed when a conservative supreme justice died within a year of a new president being elected. All of a sudden it was not ok to leave such a vacancy open, and Judge Garland’s dismissal by the Rs became the Dems rational for their current grudge match towards the more moderate Gorsuch nomination.
Now, the nuclear option appears to be only pathway to get a person, with an unblemished, reasonable record, on the court. The Dems again have amnesia about their own history of self serving remarks, balking actions, and own overriding method to circumvent a 60 vote floor, defaulting to painting the Rs as the party of the “uncooperative.” Is this flaming hypocricy? No, it’s how the Dems play politics – hard ball and without much regard for future party relationships, or how it might effect the people they are supposedly representing.
Consequently, IMO, the ONLY choices are A, followed by D when the Dems foolishly go ahead with their childish fillibuster.