President Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court, Judge Neil Gorsuch, is a solid replacement and a worthy successor to Justice Antonin Scalia, who, for nearly 30 years, was a staunch defender of constructionism and textualism on the High Court. The Senate has the opportunity to fill Scalia’s seat with someone who reflects his approach to the Constitution.
Unfortunately, Senate Democrats are pitching a collective fit, pledging to filibuster Gorsuch’s nomination. Some have gone so far as to vow to filibuster anyone Trump nominates.
This coming from a party who, throughout the course of President Barack Obama’s presidency, reminded Republicans that Obama won the 2008 election and reelection in 2012 and more than suggested that he should get his way on nominees, no questions asked.
Senate Democrats have clearly plotted a course of obstructionism on nearly every cabinet nominee. The #DoYourJob Party actually boycotted an official hearing. It’s clear that Trump’s Supreme Court pick will get the same sad treatment.
Without question, Gorsuch is qualified to serve on the Supreme Court. Appointed by President George W. Bush in May 2006 to serve on the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, Gorsuch has proved himself to be in the mold of Justice Scalia, both in his approach to the Constitution and insightful, often humorous, writings. He rejects the Supreme Court’s Chevron deference, which required federal courts to defer to regulatory agencies’ interpretations of "silent or ambiguous" statutes.