Gorsuch reassures senators of his independence from the White House
Donald Trump's pick for the Supreme Court, Neil Gorsuch, has assured a Senate committee that he has never been asked to make any promises on rulings by the President's administration; and that that he would have "walked out the door" if he had been asked to overturn the groundbreaking abortion-rights case, Roe v. Wade.
The Senate Judiciary Committee are meeting for the second day of Mr Gorsuch’s confirmation hearing for a Supreme Court seat, amid concerns from Democrats that Mr Gorsuch will be beholden to the man that nominated him. Republican Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa, chair of the Judiciary Committee, began by questioning Mr Gorsuch on his independence from politics.
Mr Gorsuch said that was a “softball” question, easy for him to answer definitively. “I decide cases... it makes me think of [Supreme Court Justice] Byron White,” Mr Gorsuch said. He noted that he admired Mr White’s “fierce, rugged independence.”
Mr Gorsuch went on to cite the Oath of Supreme Court Justices, saying “[I will] administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich.”
“I leave all the other stuff at home,” said Mr Gorsuch.
“When I became a judge, they gave me a gavel not a rubber stamp,” Mr Gorsuch said, adding that no one, including the President, was “above the law.” One of the biggest concerns for Democrats and women’s rights advocates groups is President Trump’s promise to nominate a Supreme Court judge that would overturn Roe v. Wade.
The Supreme Court in part makes decisions on new cases based on rulings in past Supreme Court cases, and Mr Grassley questioned Mr Gorsuch regarding precedent.
Mr Gorsuch said Supreme Court precedents deserve respect, even as he sidestepped answering whether he thought a series of contentious cases from the past had been decided correctly. He said it would be "beginning of the end" of the independent judiciary if judges had to indicate how they would rule in future cases. Bringing in Roe v Wade, Mr Gorsuch said “precedent is like judges’ shared family history, it deserves respect.”
He noted that he would not sit in front of the committee and say what was his “favourite or least favourite precedent,” noting that good judges would not do that because it signals pre-judgement rather than ruling on the facts presented in a case. “I didn’t want that kind of judge as a lawyer,” Mr Gorsuch said.
California Democrat Senator Dianne Feinstein pushed Mr Gorsuch on whether he thinks Roe v. Wade had “super precedent.” Mr Gorsuch said following precedent “adds to the determinacy of law… it’s part of the reason the rule of law works so well” in the US.
Roe v. Wade has been “reaffirmed.. .dozens of times” when challenged in subsequent Supreme Court cases, Ms Feinstein pushed again. Mr Gorsuch agreed, “it has been reaffirmed several times.”
Mr Trump has repeatedly assailed the judiciary both as a candidate and since taking office. Mr Trump condemned federal judges who have put on hold his two executive orders to ban the entry into the United States of people from several Muslim-majority countries.
In a Twitter post during the hearing on Tuesday, Mr Trump praised Mr Gorsuch as “the kind of judge we need” for the high court.
Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse pressed Mr Gorsuch to call for the anonymous financial backers behind the Judicial Crisis Network conservative legal advocacy group's $10m campaign supporting his nomination to identify themselves, but the nominee refused to do so, saying he would not engage in politics. But Mr Gorsuch added, “Nobody speaks for me.”
If Mr Gorsuch is confirmed by the Senate, as expected, he would restore a narrow 5-4 conservative court majority. The seat has been vacant for 13 months, since the death of conservative justice Antonin Scalia. Democrats have only a slim chance of blocking his nomination in the Republican-led Senate. Some Democrats have said Republicans “stole” a Supreme Court seat last year when the Senate refused to
consider Democratic former President Barack Obama's nominee to replace
The Court's ideological leaning could help determine the outcome of cases involving the death penalty, abortion, gun control, environmental regulations, transgender rights, voting rights, immigration, religious liberty, presidential powers and more.