Neil Gorsuch Faces the Senate

From Discourse DB
Revision as of 19:14, March 22, 2017 by Yaron Koren (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{Item |author=The New York Times editorial board |source=The New York Times |date=March 20, 2017 |url=")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is an opinion item.

Author(s) The New York Times editorial board
Source The New York Times
Date March 20, 2017
Quotes-start.png Judge Gorsuch became President Trump's nominee only after Senate Republicans’ outrageous and unprecedented blockade of Merrick Garland, whom President Barack Obama picked to fill the same seat more than a year ago and who by all rights should long ago have been sitting where Judge Gorsuch is now — introducing his family, smiling for the flashbulbs and listening patiently as senators lecture him about the Constitution. But Senate Republicans made sure that would never happen, refusing even to meet with Judge Garland — the chief of the federal appeals court in Washington and one of the most widely respected judges in the country — let alone give him a hearing or a vote. Quotes-end.png

Add or change this opinion item's references

This item argues against the position Gorsuch should be confirmed on the topic Neil Gorsuch Supreme Court nomination.