Trump Basically Says Starting Tonight, Hell Will Rain Down on Iran
After Ousting Graham Platner in Maine, Bernie Sanders Says President Trump Doesn't Believe...
Representation Matters in Movies, Right Up Until It Doesn't
Did Jon Ossoff Really Say This About Liberty and Supporting ICE?
CNBC Lists the Ten 'Worst' States to Live In. See If You Can...
The New York Times Explainer for Its Catch-and-Kill Report to Benefit Graham Platner
Congress' Most Prolific Stock Traders Are Holding a Ritzy Fundraiser for Democrat Elaine...
Sarah Trone Garriott Is Running for Congress in Iowa, and She Wants Socialized...
To Democrats, the Economy Is Just One Massive Jobs Program
These Three Arizona Democrats Are Backed by the Soros Family
Marco Rubio Just Declared War on the International Criminal Court and International Law
Iran Launches Strikes Against Maritime Vessels in the Strait of Hormuz
Twelve Democrat States Block Paramount Merge with Warner Bros
A Grand Prix Race Heads to DC – But It Wasn't An Easy...
Exclusive: Democrat Paige Cognetti Says the U.S. Occupies 'Stolen Land' in Unearthed Video
Tipsheet

Democratic Senator Who Thought Filibustering Judges Was Tyranny Of The Minority Now Supports Blocking Gorsuch

Democratic Senator Who Thought Filibustering Judges Was Tyranny Of The Minority Now Supports Blocking Gorsuch

Guy wrote about Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM) said in 2013, that filibustering judges was nothing more than tyranny of the minority. This is what he said:

I think what our role is, is to step out there, advise and consent, and if we don't believe the person's qualified, if there's some real serious problem, vote against them. You remember Bork. He wasn't filibustered. He was voted down, 58 votes against him. People like Scalia, everybody says, oh, well, there are going to be more Scalias. Scalia passed unanimously. Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court passed with just three votes against her, 96-3. So the issue really is advice and consent, not with supermajorities. Right now, we have the tyranny of the minority. And that's what we have taken care of."
Advertisement

Well, that was 2013 Udall, who’s been kidnapped by 2017 Udall. The New Mexico Senator now says he will hop on Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s inane ‘filibuster Gorsuch’ train and oppose his nomination (Albuquerque Journal):

Sen. Tom Udall will oppose the nomination of Neil Gorsuch to the U.S. Supreme Court, saying that the 10th Circuit Appeals Court judge failed to answer key questions during his Senate confirmation hearings this week.

Udall’s announcement comes in the wake of Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s call on Thursday to filibuster Gorsuch. Sen. Martin Heinrich, a New Mexico Democrat, has not yet publicly said whether her intends to vote for or against Gorsuch’s nomination.

“I have met with Judge Gorsuch, followed the hearings in the Senate Judiciary Committee, and studied his record, and decided that I can’t support his confirmation,” Udall said in a statement provided to the Journal. “He failed to answer questions that are critical for me — his position on the rights of working mothers, whether women can choose their own health care decisions, LGBTQ rights, and dark money in our elections.”

Ever since Schumer announced his intention to lead this idiotic crusade to block Gorsuch, all eyes are on the nine or so Senate Democrats who have said that Trump’s Supreme Court nominee—Gorsuch—should get a hearing and a vote. What that is remains to be seen. Are they talking about the panel vote? Do they mean cloture? If it is cloture, then that’s the ballgame. Gorsuch will get the 60 votes to end debate and move his nomination for a final vote in which only a majority is needed for confirmation. If it isn’t, well—Democrats are acting dumber than usual, trying to cater to their hyper left wing base that demands all-out war against Trump’s agenda, despite the party being ill-equipped to put up much of a fight against Republicans. You would think that Senate Democrats would opt to keep their powder dry for when the balance of the Court would be threatened (in their eyes) if a second vacancy should occur during Trump’s presidency. Instead, they’re lining up for this circus, where a conservative is replacing a conservative on the Supreme Court.

Advertisement

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement