Skip to main content

'Hypocritical' Heat: Democrats Question Gorsuch's Worth and Philosophy

Share This article

WASHINGTON -- Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch has been dodging and weaving barrages of questions from Senate Democrats for several days now. So first thing Wednesday, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., blasted away at him.

"What worries me is you have been able to avoid specificity like no one I have ever seen before," she charged. "And maybe that's a virtue. I don't know. But for us on this side, knowing where you stand on major questions of the day is really important to vote 'aye.' And so that's why we press and press and press."

GOP Lawmaker Calls Out Democrats' Hypocrisy
               
Republican senators, however, called the Democrats' stand hypocrisy.   

Looking at his Democratic colleagues, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. said, "I'm not sure I've been playing the same game as everybody else. I may need to reevaluate what game I need to be playing in the future."

Quoting one of his Democratic colleagues, Graham said, "'It's important to know where you stand before I can vote yes.' I think that's true for a Republican nominee, not so much for a Democrat."

Graham added, "Let me tell you what Sen. Leahy (D-Vt.) said: 'I certainly don't want you to lay out a test here in the abstract which might determine what your vote or your test would be in a case that you have yet to see that may well come before the Supreme Court.' Now that's the standard when there's a Democratic nominee."

He went on to say they're applying a different standard now that they're questioning a Republican nominee.

And Graham found the idea that Gorsuch isn't a moderate judge worthy of support by both sides laughable.

"Sen. Feinstein said her goal was to find out if you're reasonable, mainstream, conservative," he recalled. "I will tell you, Sen. Feinstein, without any hesitation, this man is as mainstream as you will get."

"If you don't believe me, listen to the people who know him the best: 2,700 cases and being reversed once," he noted. "The bottom line here is, we're taking the nomination process to a place it was never intended to go by the framers of the Constitution."

'Originalism' Jeopardizing Minorities, Women?

Feinstein tackled Gorsuch's support of originalism, the idea of ruling based on what the original drafters of the Constitution and its amendments meant. She suggested that could take the rights of women and minorities backward.

She asked, "Do you agree with Justice Scalia's statements that originalism means there is no protection for women or gays and lesbians under the Equal Protection law because this was not the intent or understanding of those who drafted the 14th Amendment in 1868?"

On day 3 of Neil Gorsuch's confirmation hearings, senators battled each other over the Supreme Court pick’s nomination. Specifically, they wanted answers about his stand for originalism. Watch below.

"The point of originalism – textualism – whatever label you want to put on it, what a good judge strives to do and I think we all do is strive to understand what the words on the page mean," he replied. "Not import words that come from us, but apply what you, the people's representatives – lawmakers – have done."

"And so when it comes to equal protection of the laws, for example, it matters not a whit that some of the drafters of the 14th Amendment were racists – because they were," he noted, "or sexist – because they were. The law they drafted promises equal protection of the laws to all persons. That's what they wrote."

Gorsuch added, "I think that guarantee – equal protection of the laws' guarantee – the 14th Amendment, that it took a civil war for this country to win is maybe the most radical guarantee in all of the Constitution and it may be in all of human history."

Feinstein shot back, "If one looks at originalism in my context, which is real life, I want your two daughters to have every opportunity they possibly could have, be treated equal, be able to control their own bodies in concert with their religion, their doctor – whatever it may be – and not be conscribed to a lesser fate because the law is interpreted in a backward sense."

Gorsuch answered, "My two teenage daughters – you're right – I want every opportunity for them that a young man has."

Feinstein warned, "But you are pivotal in this."

Gorsuch replied, "And no one is looking to take us back to horse and buggy days. We're trying to interpret the law faithfully."

Share This article

About The Author

Paul
Strand

Como corresponsal del buró de noticias de CBN en Washington DC, Paul Strand ha cubierto una variedad de temas políticos y sociales, con énfasis en defensa, justicia y el Congreso. Strand comenzó su labor en CBN News en 1985 como editor de asignaciones nocturnas en Washington, DC. Después de un año, trabajó con CBN Radio News por tres años, volviendo a la sala de redacción de televisión para aceptar un puesto como editor en 1990. Después de cinco años en Virginia Beach, Strand se trasladó de regreso a la capital del país, donde ha sido corresponsal desde 1995. Antes de unirse a CBN News, Strand