On today’s BradCast: Donald Trump’s U.S. Supreme Court nominee faced questions all day in the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee. But what the hell is Judge Neil Gorsuch even doing there at all? And doesn’t normal coverage of the hearings do little more than normalize a decidedly abnormal situation? [Audio link to show follows below.]
Donald Trump’s selection to fill the seat left vacant by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia more than a year ago, represents nothing less than a stolen seat on a stolen U.S. Supreme Court. If he is confirmed, Republicans are likely to be rewarded for their theft with a majority on the high court for another generation, following their unprecedented refusal to even hold hearings for Barack Obama’s nominee for the seat, Judge Merrick Garland.
I’ve been wrestling with how to cover this week’s hearings, which I consider to be illegitimate (and that is true even setting aside the disturbing matter of Trump as President!) Professor Peter M. Shane of Ohio State University’s Moritz College of Law joins me to try and help make sense of the situation. His recent piece at the American Constitutional Society, cited by the New York Times today, details how neither Democrats nor corporate media, to date, seem to have figured out how to issue any kind of institutional penalty for the GOP’s blatant, brazen and unheard of theft.
Shane explains that, historically, despite Republican assertions to the contrary, “there is no close precedent” in history for what the GOP has done here. “The reason that they didn’t want Judge Garland to become Justice Garland was, of course, the fear that they would be losing what had been a secure 5-4 conservative majority on the court. But they also didn’t want to give him a hearing because they knew, if they gave him a hearing, that Judge Garland would appear to be so thoughtful, so reasonable, so accomplished and balanced a person, that it would be politically much more difficult to vote ‘no’. Nobody in the Senate is constitutionally obligated to vote in favor of Judge Garland, it would just be hard to explain why [they didn’t.]”
So they stole the seat instead, by refusing to even hold a hearing, much less a vote. As to the Democrats’ lack of an organized response, such as a promise to filibuster Judge Gorsuch (or any other Trump nominee other than Garland), despite the threat of the GOP doing away with the filibuster for SCOTUS nominees, Shane observes: “It seems to me that the Democrats very frequently anticipate the political defeat that lies ahead, and just keep their powder dry for a fight that never happens.” He argues Dems are likely “worried about political blowback for being a fierce party of resistance,” adding: “That’s what the Republicans have been, increasingly, since 1980. If they’ve paid a penalty for it, I haven’t noticed.”
Also on today’s program: While Congressional hearings have taken over the beginning of the week, House Republicans are making last minute changes to their scheme to replace the Affordable Care Act, by making it still crueler for millions of Americans (but with even more kickbacks for wealthy ones!) in hopes of wheeling and dealing for enough votes to squeek by with passage in the U.S. House, where they plan to ram the bill through for a full floor vote this week before tossing it to the Senate.
Finally: A majority of Americans are unable to name even a single SCOTUS Justice, and the tax-payer cost for Trump’s constant weekend vacations could cover four federal programs for the arts, the elderly, the jobless and the homeless that his budget proposal hopes to slash entirely…
I agree. The only responsible, acceptable response to this unprecedented theft of a Supreme Court seat is full court obstruction, whatever it takes, to try to stop them. Anything else is enabling pure abusive bullshit. I hate these lying, hypocritical fuckers.
And by the way, fuck Gorsuch. If he had an ounce of moral courage, he’d use his national platform to insist on a vote for Garland. He’s enabling the GOP’s atrocious behavior as much as anyone. As an “originalist” does he really believe this is what our founders intended?
As with Alito and Scalia, Gorsuch is lying his ass off.
What Gorsuch is saying to the committee has nothing to do with how he has ruled in the past which is how he will rule in the future.
And, yes, the Dems will enable it… because they can’t pry their brown noses away from that sweet, sweet corporate ass.
“Donald Trump’s selection to fill the seat left vacant by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia more than a year ago, represents nothing less than a stolen seat on a stolen U.S. Supreme Court.”
And this is the SECOND time the GOP has stolen a seat on the High Court. In 2000, the only significant problem with counting votes occurred in Florida where the Governor was the brother of the candidate who just happened to have everything go his way there. My, my, what a coincidence. And, subsequently, the GOP gets to put more Judges on the bench overall and to the Supreme Court in particular. And that turned out to be important because it made the gutting of the Voting Rights Act possible. Mmm. And that just happens to work to the advantage of the GOP. My, my, what a coincidence.
David Lasagna, you are right on target. If Gorsuch “had an ounce of moral courage, he’d use his national platform to insist on a vote for Garland.”
[O/T, but a familiar one.]
Took a few months but the bus finally got him.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/...h-voter-fraud/
Time and again, with these Republicans, one can’t help thinking of Joseph Welch saying to Senator McCarthy,”At long last, sir, have you no shame?”
I really think the media needs to figure out more aggressive ways of asking questions that involves shaming these people. I’m not sure that they DO have a capacity for shame but I know they don’t like feeling uncomfortable. You see that in all their town halls. We should make them as uncomfortable as we can for as long as it takes.
David Lasagna said:
They don’t. And you are exactly right about Gorsuch’s moral courage. There should be nothing but outrage from the Democrats!