[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 163 (2017), Part 4]
[Senate]
[Page 4475]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                       NOMINATION OF NEIL GORSUCH

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, yesterday, President Trump's nominee to 
the Supreme Court, Judge Neil Gorsuch, was introduced in the Judiciary 
Committee for opening statements. We all look forward to today's round 
of questioning, during which I hope the nominee will be more 
forthcoming than he was with me. I am very sympathetic to the fact that 
judges should not offer opinions on cases that could come before the 
Court lest they bias themselves. Every Senator is aware of that. We 
know to ask general questions or questions about cases previously 
decided to get a sense of a judge's philosophy.
  In our meeting, Judge Gorsuch refused to even answer those questions. 
For instance, I asked him a very simple question. I said forget about 
the case that was then pending in the Ninth Circuit on the Executive 
order. I said: Let's say Congress passed a law: No Muslim could enter 
the United States. Would that be unconstitutional?
  He even refused to answer that question. So I hope he will be more 
willing to answer questions in the Judiciary Committee today, 
particularly about his views of important Supreme Court cases of the 
past and his own ideology. This idea that judges judge regardless of 
ideology is totally belied by the fact that there is a coalition right 
now--four judges on one side, four judges on the other. Four appointed 
by Democratic Presidents who generally rule one way, four appointed by 
Republican Presidents who generally rule the other.
  If it was just interpreting the law without any input from a person's 
life and thoughts and ideology, we would not have that stark breakdown, 
but we do. In my view, the hard right, in trying to populate the bench 
with people way over, has adopted this philosophy, starting with Miguel 
Estrada: Don't answer the questions because if the American people knew 
how you really felt, they would not want you on the bench.
  Let's take the case of President Trump. Of course President Trump 
considered ideology when he selected Judge Gorsuch off a list culled by 
the far-right Heritage Foundation and Federalist Society. He did not 
pick the judges himself. He went to these extreme groups and said: You 
make a list. I promise I will pick people from that list.
  Do you think organizations--these organizations--dedicated to a 
certain ideological viewpoint, did not consider ideology when building 
their list of possible Supreme Court picks? Of course they did.
  President Trump said himself, he wanted to appoint a Justice who 
would overturn Roe v. Wade. The idea that he selected a judicious, 
neutral judge is belied by the selection process, totally and 
amazingly. That is how the President considered these judges. So it is 
not unreasonable for Senators to consider and question the ideology of 
a nominee in committee. President Trump sure did when he came up with a 
list. The only way for the Judiciary Committee to do that is if the 
nominee is willing to answer specific questions. If he is not willing 
to answer specific questions, what is the purpose of even holding a 4-
day hearing?
  Before I move on to another topic, I would like to point out that it 
is the height of irony that Republicans held this Supreme Court seat 
open for nearly a calendar year while President Obama was in office but 
are now rushing to fill the seat for a President whose campaign is 
under investigation by the FBI.
  Even Representative Nunes, the Republican chairman of the House 
Intelligence Committee, said the investigation, confirmed yesterday by 
FBI Director Comey, puts a ``big gray cloud'' over this administration. 
You can bet if the shoe were on the other foot and a Democratic 
President was under investigation by the FBI, the Republicans would be 
howling at the Moon about filling a Supreme Court seat in such 
circumstances.
  After all, they stopped the President who was not under investigation 
from filling a seat with nearly a year left in his Presidency. It is 
unseemly to be moving forward so fast on confirming a Supreme Court 
Justice with a lifetime appointment while this ``big gray cloud'' of an 
FBI investigation hangs over the Presidency.

                          ____________________