Sunshine poured into the Rose Garden during Monday’s public swearing-in ceremony of Neil Gorsuch to the United States Supreme Court. Little black rain clouds soon followed in the form of the usual galactic vapidity from the Left, launched amid much weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth.
The stakes in the ‘battle of wills’ that led to this moment were high. Much higher, in fact, than filling the vacancy created by Antonin Scalia’s death last year.
Mark it: If the Democratic filibuster had succeeded and the Gorsuch nomination derailed, it would’ve emboldened Democrats to launch an encore with the next high court pick. Successfully deployed once, a Democractic filibuster would’ve been subsequently deployed against every other Trump nominee to come down the pike. They would likewise be doomed to failure because Republicans would’ve signaled a willingness to throw in the towel when things get rough, effectively taking up permanent residence under a white flag.
In short, if Republicans had caved on Gorsuch and “changed the nominee,” they would’ve lost the whole Supreme Court smack. That’s why the nuclear option was the right move. Like Mitch McConnell or not, he got it right this time. The destiny of not just Gorsuch but every other Trump nominee to any federal bench was at stake.
Defeated on the Gorsuch vote, Senate Democrats are now where they should be – on the ropes and in disarray – instead of salivating over the next opportunity to stage an encore.
They were – and are – Going. Ballistic. Like deeming the following “out of the mainstream” and “extreme”:
- According to Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA), “The judge’s job, our nominee says, is to deliver on the promise that ‘all litigants, rich or poor, mighty or meek, will receive equal protection under the law and due process for their grievances.”
- Recognizing the limited role and specific power of the Supreme Court.
- Affirming the concepts of fair and equal access to justice.
- Firm alignment with Scalia on the role of judges, who he said “should be in the business of declaring what the law is, using the traditional tools of interpretation, rather than pronouncing the law as they might wish it to be in light of their own political views.”
- Holding a Harvard law degree and a PhD in legal philosophy from Oxford.
For these and other heinous offenses like – gasp! – being an originalist, Senate Democrats assailed Gorsuch as “out of the mainstream.” Which makes us wonder. In what stream, exactly, are 45 Democrat senators dipping their oars?
Judging from all the Chicken Little caterwauling about the end of Western civilization as we know it with the addition of a supremely qualified originalist to the high court – finally – Neil Gorsuch has Lefties scared spitless. Why? Because as anyone who’s been paying attention to politics for say, twenty minutes or so, can tell you – the courts are where Leftistas have a regular field day.
Leftistas know they can’t push their agenda through at the ballot box. Or the legislature. So they run to the nearest courthouse. Forum shop. And file suit. And we’re stuck with legal precedent – often for years – sometimes at odds with the expressed will of the people at the voting booth.
Called “legislating from the bench,” this is a common practice among judicial activists who push a particular agenda or political view instead of interpret the law. It happens all the time, especially when a Lefty president is making appointments. (To be clear, I also oppose conservative judicial activism. Making law is a function of the legislative branch, not the judicial.)
That’s why appointing judges to the federal bench is one of the most important roles of the president. (If you don’t vote in a presidential election for any other reason, vote for this reason.) In fact, the Supreme Court seat was a major reason some conservatives who disliked Donald Trump held their nose and voted for him anyway last November.
Leftistas understand this. It’s one reason they’re going nuts over Gorsuch.
Take this email I received from Organizing for Action Monday. The subject line was Stolen Supreme Court Seat. (Give these peeps some credit. At least they’re faithfully regurgitating the same pre-chewed Lefty talking points.) The first paragraph in the message, which arrived a few hours after the Gorsuch swearing-in, was priceless:
Let’s be perfectly clear
about what just happened.
Justice Gorsuch was just handed a lifetime appointment to a stolen Supreme Court seat by way of Mitch McConnell’s unprecedented overhaul of the rules of the United States Senate.
Can you say “Harry Reid”?
On the up side: Leftistas have just discovered stealing! Ditto being “perfectly clear”! Where these dear hearts were on “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor,” a private basement email server or weaponizing the IRS remains unclear.
Maybe they’ll blame it on a bad YouTube video.
Regarding that idiot “stolen seat” line. Sour grapes much? Congressman Adam Kinzinger (R., Ill.) tweeted what most anyone with half a brain already knows:
— Adam Kinzinger (@AdamKinzinger) April 10, 2017
But wait. It gets better. In the next sentence of its message, OFA proclaims:
We’re organizing against the kind of partisan games that got us here.
Newsflash: What “got you here,” Leftistas, was a lousy, corrupt candidate with no message other than a government-centric “solution” to every problem and a party that hasn’t had a new idea since Woodrow Wilson.
Of course, the crème de la crème in yesterday’s Chicken Little email was that bit about “partisan games.” Where in the h-e- double toothpicks have these people been for the last eight years-ish?
Not to worry, dear ballistic Leftistas. Here are a few words of advice. (Throwin’ this in for free, so you oughtta like this.) Go retreat to your safe space. Grab some crayons. Turn off Joy Behar and tune out Madonna. Double down with your latest Lena Dunham book and lose the stolen Kool Aid.
In other words: Suck it up, cupcakes. (You may want to scare up some dentures while you’re at it.)
Meanwhile, it’s impossible to know for sure how Gorsuch will rule on specific cases. But constitutional conservatives may rightly heave a sigh of relief that a strong originalist has joined the bench who’s likely to tip the balance of the court in favor of the Constitution. Besides. Any jurist who has Leftistas this rattled is probably doing something right.
It’s about time.
The commentary first appeared on the author’s blog, Conservelocity.