Why Neil Gorsuch Was The Right Choice For The Supreme Court

2
163
Roe v Wade

Neil McGill Gorsuch was a former judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, he remained in the position since 2006, and has been acclaimed by many different figures from around the country. The Supreme Court Justice has since obtained a role of what some claim, is subordination on the court compared to his colleagues. Justice Gorsuch was the right choice for the vacancy on the Supreme Court. Reasons for support of the Justice include his ability to cross partisan lines and dedication to unbiased judgement of the law. Although many proclaim Gorsuch as a Scalia replica, the Justice has many distinct qualities and differences to those of his predecessor.

An example of why Neil Gorsuch was the right choice for the Supreme Court is his ability to cross partisan lines. Many in government proclaim partisan heckle on the issue of nominating a justice towards their side; as demonstrated with Merrick Garland, the Supreme Court nominee by former President Barrack Obama. Outcry from the Democrats was demonstrated when Garland was rejected from confirmation hearings by Republicans. The Republicans were unjust in their ways of denying him, while also standing up to hypocrisy when Trump nominated Neil Gorsuch. After the president did, Republicans flocked to gain support for the Justice, but seemed to fall short with sheer numbers. They then erased a 200-year-old rule, successfully re-establishing the nuclear option, allowing Republicans to confirm Gorsuch with just 51 votes. Gorsuch, though happy, would have most likely disapproved of the action. The constitutionality of making the rule is there in the law, but rushing to confirm him by Republicans, while previously ignoring the Democratic calls to confirm their nominee, are just the hectic result of partisan politics.

With this, under the George W. Bush administration, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was defending the detention policies of President George Bush. In response to the events, Neil Gorsuch said, “It is long overdue for the administration to get out publicly and defend our detention policies, trumpet their successes, while also admitting the inevitable and regrettable errors.” This statement expressed his beliefs in fighting against the mistreatment of those in American detention centers, even though some might be possible terrorists. Despite going against most of the conservative spectrum of the aisle, Gorsuch pursed anyway. This shows his ability to be bipartisan with both sides of the political spectrum. In such, being bipartisan in connotation is the ability to cross partisan lines.

Another explanation for why Neil Gorsuch was the right choice for the Supreme Court was  his dedication to unbiased judgement of the law. Gorsuch contains the political personality of which he is not partisan, but unbiased. He takes the law into broader context rather than politically, therefore becoming nonpartisan. Mr. Gorsuch said during a court case, “If a seventh grader starts trading fake burps for laughs in gym class, what’s a teacher to do? Order extra laps? Detention? A trip to the principal’s office? Maybe. But then again, maybe that’s too old school. Maybe today you call a police officer.” In the context of this quote, Gorsuch’s court was deciding on whether or not it was justified if a student was to be arrested by police after disrupting class with fake burps at school. Though Justice Gorsuch personally aligns on the right side of the political spectrum, of which this is hailed by many conservatives, he took the side of the law, and not politics, unlike his colleagues. He ruled in favor of the student based on justification under law, not by the ideologies supporting the police. This shows his abstract view of the law and the context it’s placed in, rather than by his perspective.

Although many proclaim Gorsuch as a Scalia replica, Republicans and Democrats alike, the Justice has many distinct qualities and differences to that of his predecessor, for the better. The basis of opposition for the Justice is that Neil Gorsuch is too similar to the beliefs held by his predecessor, both of which are positives and negatives. Although the Justice does share considerable amounts of likeness to the former Supreme Court Justice, Antonin Scalia, Justice Neil Gorsuch remains his own, independently judging cases based on the constitution, not by personal preference. As Justice Gorsuch said in his confirmation hearings, “everyone is equal in the eyes of the law,” this of which signifies his diligence to the judging of the law, rather than opinions. The counter-argument to this is deceptive, in that it states that the judge is too similar to his predecessor, Scalia. This is illogical, as the judges both base their cases off of the constitution itself, not by personal feelings, and therefore, are not similar in terms of their decisions, but of how they make them. Both Justices Scalia and Gorsuch share similarities of which are indisputable, but the outcome of their decisions compared to how they interpret cases are different, and for the betterment of the law.

Justice Gorsuch still remains the right choice for the vacancy on the Supreme Court. Reasons for support of the Justice include his ability to cross partisan lines and dedication to unbiased judgement of the law. Gorsuch’s pursuit of crossing partisan lines and unbiased judgement of the law show his ability to work with all sides, as long as it follows the constitution, and not the opinions of those with different views on the political spectrum. The Justice has been hailed by harsh critics and supporters, showing Mr. Gorsuch’s ability to be in agreement with different people that have different views than his own. With this, one can take that Justice Gorsuch is a person of the law, rather than interest. A person of constitutionality, rather than feelings. A person of fairness, not nonpartisan schism. Justice Neil Gorsuch was the right choice for the Supreme Court of the United States and will continue to remain unbiased, uninfluenced, and constitutional.

* Jacob Tabb is a minarchist libertarian committed to ideals of Republicanism over Democracy, freedom to the utmost extent for all, and ending government corruption which prevents liberty in the forms of social and economic terms. He is the owner of an independent news company called UBC News and has been facilitating and expanding its content for over two years now.

The following two tabs change content below.
The main BeingLibertarian.com account, used for editorials and guest author submissions. The views expressed here belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect our views and opinions. Contact the Editor at [email protected]