A local group met to discus Supreme Court pick

As Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch prepares for his confirmation hearing next week, liberal groups in Missouri are coming out against him.

He said he expects Democrats to create a bunch of “noise” during the hearing to appease their base, but they will not force Republicans to use the “nuclear option”.

The group wants to make sure senators are pressing Gorsuch on Trump’s actions and voicing citizen concerns.

Through letters, endorsements and support work, the effort surpasses the 2006 campaign to get Gorsuch confirmed to his current seat on the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals – a fight that included an assist from Philip Anschutz, the billionaire and Colorado powerbroker. Conservative and GOP-related groups have outspent Democrats on TV by more than $3 million, according to Democrats and Republicans tracking the advertising figures. For 10 months, Senate Republicans stonewalled and blocked Judge Garland’s nomination, all to spite President Obama.

Conservative legal activists who support the nomination say that Democrats are cherry-picking a small number of rulings that distort Gorsuch’s 11-year record as a judge.

Yet, evidence that the trend is continuing is witnessed by the public battle over Gorsuch’s nomination, Whitehouse said.

“It’s unclear exactly where he [Gorsuch] falls on the spectrum among conservative justices, but he certainly would fall on the conservative side of the line”, said University of California, Irvine law professor Rick Hasen.

Justice Antonin Scalia received a confirmation vote of 98-0.

Progressive groups are sounding alarm.

“If a nominee can not get 60 votes, you don’t change the rules, you change the nominee”, Schumer said.

“This is the genius of Trump’s madness”, said Craig Varoga, a Democratic operative who has directed spending at many of his party’s top nonprofits over the years. I hope that Democrats in the Senate figure out a way to retaliate for this cynical, deceptive power play on the part of Republicans. Then, of course, he stacked his Cabinet with hard-right, anti-government billionaires from places like Exxon Mobil and Goldman Sachs.

Judge Gorsuch summed up that switch as “effectively pulling out from petitioners like Mr. Gutierrez-Brizeula a rug that the agency itself set under them”.

“I think that the Democrats realize they have likely lost on this issue, and will keep their powder dry for the next Supreme Court vacancy where the stakes will be much higher”, Malcolm said. When asked about a particular area of law or case the Supreme Court has decided, the stock answers are, “That case is established precedent”, “That issue may come before the Court, so I can not comment at this time” and “Let me give you a lecture about this area of the law” – the equivalent of laughing in the face of the question-asker.

Gorsuch’s hearings will start Monday before the Senate Judiciary Committee, which includes Sen. In fact, they shouldn’t ask him any questions that could be answered this way.

In the cases argued by Mr. Cook and Ms. Lichter, Judge Gorsuch blocked immigration officials from changing the rules mid-game. Some court observers believe that Gorsuch can’t do worse than Scalia, so his confirmation will simply put things back to the way they were. “This is an advise-and-consent position, and it’s up to us to carry it out properly”.

Republicans are wholeheartedly endorsing Gorsuch. “I would say it’s up to Mitch, but I would say, ‘Go for it'”. Seriously, had you ever heard of the Two Speech Rule before?

“In our view, the Supreme Court has for decades embraced a deeply flawed approach to the laws governing money in our politics”, the House members’ letter said. We know other nominees have been confirmed in election years.