Tom Brokaw advises Democrats not to block Gorsuch: ‘Why pick that as a fight?’

[WestVirginiaRebel]

The Blaze:

Former NBC News anchor Tom Brokaw advised the Democratic Party on Friday against trying to block President Donald Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court, U.S. Circuit Court Judge Neil Gorsuch.

 

During during a panel discussion on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” about recent violent protests at the University of California, Berkeley, Brokaw noted that “rage is not a policy.”

 

“You’ve got to figure out what you want to do,” Brokaw said. “For example, there is going to be a big pushback about Judge Gorsuch on the part of the Democrats, they’re going to make that one of their testing places for them.”

 

He said that Gorsuch “has a very distinguished background in the judicial world.”

 

“I have friends in the federal judiciary who don’t agree with his philosophy but say there is not a better judge in the federal circuit right now than him, so why pick that as a fight?” Brokaw said. “Because who are you going to get next?”

________

 

Sorry, Tom, they don't listen to reason anymore...

[Valin]

Why pick that as a fight? Because huge parts of there base Demand they do it.

[Draggingtree]

Allen Mendenhall: Trump's Supreme Court

0 Views

20 hours ago Allen Mendenhall Jeff Deist

 

Brutus, writing in The Antifederalist Papers, had this to say about judges:

 

There is no power above them, to control any of their decisions. There is no authority that can remove them, and they cannot be controlled by the laws of the legislature. In short, they are independent of the people, of the legislature, and of every power under heaven. Men placed in this situation will generally soon feel themselves independent of heaven itself.

 

Now Trump has announced his nominee for the Supreme Court. Here to explain everything from a libertarian perspective is Allen Mendenhall, a lawyer, PhD, and director of the Blackstone and Burke Center. How will Gorsuch likely rule on important issues, given what we know about him? Is he an activist, an authoritarian, an originalist, or a positivist? Is he too cozy with federal power, or does he show a libertarian Coloradan streak? And, if confirmed, will he occupy a "stolen" seat?

https://mises.org/system/tdf/Mendenhall_20170202.mp3?file=1&type=audio

https://www.mises.org/library/allen-mendenhall-trumps-supreme-court

[Draggingtree]

Why Liberals Should Back Neil Gorsuch

By NEAL K. KATYALJAN. 31, 2017

 

I am hard-pressed to think of one thing President Trump has done right in the last 11 days since his inauguration. Until Tuesday, when he nominated an extraordinary judge and man, Neil Gorsuch, to be a justice on the Supreme Court.

 

The nomination comes at a fraught moment. The new administration’s executive actions on immigration have led to chaos everywhere from the nation’s airports to the Department of Justice. They have raised justified concern about whether the new administration will follow the law. More than ever, public confidence in our system of government depends on the impartiality and independence of the courts.

 

There is a very difficult question about whether there should be a vote on President Trump’s nominee at all, given the Republican Senate’s history-breaking record of obstruction on Judge Merrick B. Garland — perhaps the most qualified nominee ever for the high court. But if the Senate is to confirm anyone, Judge Gorsuch, who sits on the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit in Denver, should be at the top of the list. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/31/opinion/why-liberals-should-back-neil-gorsuch.html