Neil Gorsuch

Follow
X

Follow

E-mail :*

In the wake of Justice Scalia’s death, the Supreme Court shifted the power to the ideological left and conservatives saw the loss of not just a great justice, but also the majority on the bench.

As the months ticked down like sand through an hourglass for Obama, his attempt to appoint Merrick Garland to the bench was blocked by Republican senators, leaving Garland to spend the rest of Obama’s term sitting, waiting, wishing for his confirmation to come.

Conservatives have enjoyed a majority on the Supreme Court for decades and the question of the reality of an ideological shift on the bench was a concern for many Republicans. That is until Trump announced his Supreme Court pick, Judge Neil Gorsuch, a federal judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit. Republicans across the country were able to breathe a little easier knowing the Supremes would once again find the right balance with a conservative justice.

Gorsuch, who has quickly become a household name, is a sound replacement for Justice Scalia as well as an excellent addition to the bench. 

Here’s why: 

Gorsuch’s legal opinions read less like a textbook and more like a New York Times bestseller and he pulls no punches when it comes to upholding the law.  In the first paragraph of a 2011 libel decision, Gorsuch explains why he did not rule in favor of the plaintiff in a defamation suit against A&E:

“Can you win damages in a defamation suit for being called a member of the Aryan Brotherhood prison gang on cable television when, as it happens, you have merely conspired with the Brotherhood in a criminal enterprise? The answer is no. While the statement may cause you a world of trouble, while it may not be precisely true, it is substantially true. And that is enough to call an end to this litigation as a matter of law.” 

While Gorsuch’s writing is lively and easily digestible to lawyers and non-lawyers alike, he also consistently tries to interpret the Constitution strictly, keeping in mind those who drafted it and adopted it. In a concurrence last March, Gorsuch pointed out, “We are not in the business of expounding a common law of torts. Ours is the job of interpreting the Constitution. And that document isn’t some inkblot on which litigants may project their hopes and dreams for a new and perfected tort law, but a carefully drafted text judges are charged with applying according to its original public meaning.” 

Gorsuch’s approach on the law is laced with common sense and believes the law holds the correct answers. “It is the role of judges to apply, not alter, the work of the people’s representatives. A judge who likes every outcome he reaches is very likely a bad judge, stretching for results he prefers rather than those the law demands, Gorsuch said upon accepting Trump’s nomination.

Neil Gorsuch’s appointment to the Supreme Court is an excellent move in the right direction toward preserving Scalia’s legacy on the bench and keeping the scales of justice tipped in favor of upholding the constitution.

 

Mary Anna Mancuso, Political Strategist and Founder of PoliticalHype.com. She is a regular contributor to Political Storm.