It's Time for the Epstein Story to Be Buried
A New Poll Shows Old Media Resistance, and Nicolle Wallace Decides Which Country...
Is Free Speech Really the Highest Value?
Dan Patrick Was Right — Carrie Prejean Boller Had to Go
The Antisemitism Broken Record
Before Protesting ICE, Learn How Government Works
Republican Congress Looks Like a Democrat Majority on TV News
Immigration Is Shaking Up Political Parties in Britain, Europe and the US
Representing the United States on the World Stage Is a Privilege, Not a...
Older Generations Teach the Lost Art of Romance
Solving the Just About Unsolvable Russo-Ukrainian War
20 Alleged 'Free Money' Gang Members Indicted in Houston on RICO, Murder, and...
'Green New Scam' Over: Trump Eliminates 2009 EPA Rule That Fueled Unpopular EV...
Tim Walz Wants Taxpayers to Give $10M in Forgivable Loans to Riot-Torn Businesses
The SAVE Act Fight Ends When It Lands on Trump's Desk for Signature
Tipsheet

WaPo's Dionne: Dems Are Simply Getting Revenge For Bush v. Gore, History of Republican 'Bullying'

WaPo's Dionne: Dems Are Simply Getting Revenge For Bush v. Gore, History of Republican 'Bullying'

Longtime Washington Post contributor E.J. Dionne, Jr. has a theory as to why Democrats are justified in their planned filibuster of Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch. Although Gorsuch has proven himself through his Senate hearings to be a non-partial, strict constitutionalist judge, liberal lawmakers are nevertheless trying to block his path to the bench. Some would say this is foolish, not only because Gorsuch is a mainstream judge, but because Democrats are picking this fight too early. Why not wait until the next Supreme Court opening – one that would require the Senate to replace a liberal justice - not a conservative justice like the late Antonin Scalia?

Advertisement

In his Wednesday op-ed, Dionne argues that Democrats have the right to engage in this warfare because Republicans have long been trying to tilt the court in their favor via "power-grabbing and bullying." It starts way back in Bush v. Gore, he argued, when five conservative judges halted the recount of Florida’s ballots in the 2000 election, securing George W. Bush the presidency. As such, he recalls, Democrats were robbed of the White House and the Supreme Court, for Bush appointed two justices of his choosing – John Roberts and Samuel Alito. Those two, Dionne explained, helped pass several cases that had right-leaning decisions. It's not a conspiracy theory, the pundit said – it proves Republicans have engaged in a “long-term conservative effort to dominate the Supreme Court and turn it to the political objectives of the right.”

He elaborated.

So let’s can all of these original-sin arguments about who started what and when in our struggles over the judiciary. From Bush v. Gore to Citizens United to Shelby County, it is the right wing that chose to thrust the court into the middle of electoral politics in an entirely unprecedented and hugely damaging way.

Guy has a different take. The Democrats, he said, are engaging in a "desperate" and "very stupid" political strategy to try and find some kind of a symbolic win for their base after an awful election performance. Their bitter battle royale, he writes, is without merit.

Advertisement

Related:

NEIL GORSUCH

Because the Democrats are planning to filibuster Gorsuch, the GOP is expected to respond by changing Senate rules to use the nuclear option, which will ensure Gorsuch only needs 51 votes to be confirmed as opposed to 60. The nuclear option was first introduced by Democrat Harry Reid.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement