[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 163 (2017), Part 4]
[Senate]
[Pages 4846-4847]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                       NOMINATION OF NEIL GORSUCH

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, on another matter, last week Supreme 
Court nominee Judge Neil Gorsuch came before the Senate Judiciary 
Committee for his confirmation hearing. His testimony reaffirmed what 
we already know about Judge Gorsuch. He is fair and impartial. He has 
an outstanding legal mind, and he is humble and well respected. He also 
has a record of building consensus.
  Here is what he said about that record at his hearing.

       I have decided . . . over 2,700 cases, and my law clerks 
     tell me that 97 percent of them have been unanimous, 99 
     percent I've been in the majority. They tell me as well that 
     according to the Congressional Research Service, my opinions 
     have attracted the fewest number of dissents from my 
     colleagues of anyone I've served with that they studied over 
     the last 10 years.

  So let's repeat that. Judge Gorsuch has ruled in more than 2,700 
cases. He has been in the majority 99 percent of the time, and 97 
percent have been unanimous decisions.
  It is no wonder the American Bar Association--an organization that 
the Democratic leader and the former Democratic Judiciary Committee 
chairman have called the ``gold standard''--gave Judge Gorsuch its 
highest rating, unanimously ``well qualified.''
  In that ABA rating, it noted: ``Based on the writings, interviews, 
and analyses we scrutinized to reach our rating, we discerned that 
Judge Gorsuch believes strongly in the judicial branch of government, 
and we predict that he will be a strong but respectful voice in 
protecting it.''
  The ABA isn't alone in its support for Judge Gorsuch. In fact, people 
from across the political spectrum have sung his praises, including 
many on the left that you might not expect--people like Professor 
Laurence Tribe, former President Obama's legal mentor, who called 
Gorsuch ``a brilliant, terrific guy who would do the Court's work with 
distinction,'' and Neal Katyal, former President Obama's top Supreme 
Court lawyer, who called him ``one of the most thoughtful and brilliant 
judges to have served our nation over the last century.''
  This is the Obama Solicitor General saying that he is ``one of the 
most thoughtful and brilliant judges to have served our nation over the 
last century.''
  There are liberal law professors, including Alan Dershowitz, who said 
Gorsuch would be ``hard to oppose on the merits,'' and Donald Elliot, 
who called him ``a brilliant mind'' who ``tries very hard to get the 
law right . . . [and] follows the law as best he can wherever it might 
lead.''
  At his confirmation hearing last week, we heard from former and 
current colleagues on the Federal bench who enthusiastically support 
his nomination. These are all Federal judges who know him well.

[[Page 4847]]

  Judge John Kane, who was appointed to the district court in Colorado 
by President Carter, wrote that Judge Gorsuch has voted both to affirm 
and reverse his decisions. ``In each instance,'' he remarked, ``I have 
felt I was clearly understood and properly informed.'' He goes on to 
say:

       I think Judge Gorsuch listens well and decides justly. His 
     dissents are instructive rather than vitriolic. In sum, I 
     think he is an excellent judicial craftsman.

  Former colleagues on the Tenth Circuit testified last week on his 
behalf as well. Two former chief judges of that circuit--one appointed 
by President Reagan and another appointed by President Clinton--have 
written that Judge Gorsuch was ``like most good judges, assiduously 
attentive to the facts and law in each case.'' Judge Deanell Tacha and 
Judge Robert Henry went on to say that if Judge Gorsuch were confirmed 
to the Supreme Court, his other important traits are not likely to 
change either--things like ``his fair consideration of opposing views, 
his remarkable intelligence, his wonderful judicial temperament 
expressed to litigants and his collegiality toward colleagues.''
  They conclude by saying:

       If we seek to confirm to the Supreme Court a noted 
     intellect, a collegial colleague, and [a] gifted and eloquent 
     writer--as well as a person of exhibited judicial 
     temperament--Gorsuch fits that bill. He represents the best 
     of the judicial tradition in our country.

  Perhaps David Frederick, a board member of the left-leaning American 
Constitution Society, best summed up why the Senate should confirm 
Judge Gorsuch. In a recent Washington Post op-ed, he praised Judge 
Gorsuch for his ``reverence for our country's values and legal 
system.''
  Mr. Frederick states:

       The facts developed in a case matter to him; the legal 
     rules established by legislatures and through precedent 
     deserve deep respect; and the importance of treating 
     litigants, counsel, and colleagues with civility is deeply 
     ingrained in him.

  Therefore, this self-proclaimed ``long-time supporter of Democratic 
candidates and progressive causes,'' said that ``the Senate should 
confirm [Gorsuch] because there is no principled reason to vote no.''
  Let me repeat that. ``The Senate should confirm him,'' he said, 
``because there is no principled reason to vote no.''
  Unfortunately, some of our Democratic colleagues are trying 
desperately to find any excuse to block this nomination. Although this 
is unfortunate, it is not surprising. Recall that the Democratic leader 
stated before Judge Gorsuch was even nominated that he would oppose any 
person on the President's long list of qualified candidates, even if it 
meant keeping the seat open for years.
  Look, we know that our Democratic friends are under an enormous 
amount of pressure from some on the far left who want them to 
``resist.'' It is clear that many radical special interest groups 
simply refuse to accept the results of the election and would like 
nothing more than to obstruct the serious work before the Senate.
  We saw the impact that had on the Cabinet confirmation process, which 
represented a historic level of obstruction. We are seeing the same 
calls for obstruction now.
  This much is clear. If our Democratic colleagues choose to hold up 
this nominee, then, they are acknowledging that they will go to any 
length--any length--to block any Supreme Court nominee of a Republican 
President. If Neil Gorsuch can't be confirmed, there is no nominee of 
any Republican President who our friends on the other side would argue 
deserves 60 votes. This isn't about the nominee at all. It isn't about 
his background. It isn't about his temperament. It isn't about his 
reputation as a judge. It is about those on the far left who want to 
prevent our country from moving forward.
  Judge Gorsuch's suitability for the appellate court was so 
noncontroversial that not a single Senate Democrat opposed his 
nomination--not then-Senator Obama, not then-Senators Biden, Clinton, 
or Kennedy, not even my good friend the Democratic leader--and there is 
no reason that Judge Gorsuch shouldn't receive similarly overwhelming 
bipartisan support now. This is an important moment for our country.
  I urge each of our colleagues to rise to the moment and together move 
forward with the confirmation of our next Supreme Court Justice, Judge 
Neil Gorsuch, and give him the up-or-down vote that he deserves.
  Will the Presiding Officer announce the business of the day.

                          ____________________