DEMOCRATS in the US Senate say they now have enough votes to try to block Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch with a filibuster, setting up a showdown with Republicans who plan to confirm him anyway.
The crucial 41st vote came from Democratic Sen Chris Coons of Delaware, who announced his decision yesterday as the Senate Judiciary Committee met to vote on Gorsuch’s nomination.
Coons said that he had decided to oppose Gorsuch’s appointment over concerns that include the vague answers the Denver-based appeals court judge gave during his hearing. Coons’s opposition will prevent Republicans from reaching the 60 votes they need to move Gorsuch over procedural hurdles to a final Senate vote.
Determined to confirm him despite Democratic objections, they will likely change Senate rules later this week to reduce the threshold from 60 to a simple majority.
The Republican-led Judiciary panel was expected to back Gorsuch and send his nomination to the full Senate, most likely on a near-party line vote.
Chairman Chuck Grassley strongly defended Gorsuch as a fair and independent man. He said Democrats had worked to try to find fault with him, but “that fault will not stick”.
Grassley said: “He’s a mainstream judge who’s earned the universal respect of his colleagues on the bench and in the bar.”
However, Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, the top Democrat on the panel, said: “Judge Gorsuch’s views were difficult to discern because he refused to answer questions, even basic questions that had been answered by previous nominees."
Democrats are angry in part because Republicans last year blocked President Barack Obama’s pick for the job, Judge Merrick Garland, after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, saying the next president should choose the nominee.
Forty Democrats and one independent have now said they will vote to block the Gorsuch nomination on a procedural cloture vote, a parliamentary step to advance the nomination, and oppose the choice.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here