We are continuing to look at Judge Neil Gorsuch, President Trump’s nominee to the Supreme
Court.
We’re joined by Nan Aron, president of Alliance for Justice.
Still with us, Ian Millhiser, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress Action
Fund, editor of ThinkProgress Justice.
Nan Aron, when you saw the pick announced in a kind of reality TV way, no one knew who
it was going to be, but at 8:00 Eastern Standard Time, President [Trump] announced that Neil
Gorsuch was his choice, and he came out with his wife, Gorsuch did.
Talk about your response and what you are most concerned about right now.
NAN ARON: Well, we were—we expected either Neil Gorsuch or Tom Hardiman.
And probably Neil Gorsuch, by the afternoon, was considered the front-runner.
I would say we were obviously very disappointed, but not surprised.
The events of the past several weeks have added new urgency to this discussion and to
the debate that will ensue over the Supreme Court.
We now know we have a president, Donald Trump, Steve Bannon, Mike Pence, who would love to
dismantle the social, economic, political progress made in this country for over a hundred
years.
And what is so critically important at this particular moment in time is to have courts—and,
in particular, a Supreme Court—that can operate as an independent check on the president’s
powers, excesses and even impulses.
So I’d say this discussion, this focus on the court, is critically important, because,
after all, while Donald Trump will be in office four years, eight years, Supreme Court justices
are on the court for life.
And so, this inquiry that will be taken by the Senate is really an important one, is
an awesome one.
But at the end of the day, we do know Neil Gorsuch.
We know his record.
And, yes, he’s very smart.
Yes, he’s very collegial.
But that’s not the end of the inquiry when you consider a Supreme Court justice.
What you need to look at is the record, as Ian has done and we have done.
And it shows an individual who will limit the ability of government to protect Americans’
air, water, medicines, food, weaken workers’ rights, civil rights, limit abortion, do away
with abortion.
He’s even criticized the courts for advancing LGBTQ rights.
So, this is a man who is really out of sync with America at the moment.
He’s not out of sync with Heritage Action.
He’s not out of sync with the Federalist Society.
He’s not out of sync with Wall—
AMY GOODMAN: Explain what the Federalist Society is.
NAN ARON: The Federalist Society is an organization, principally of law students, law teachers,
lawyers, funded in part by the Koch brothers, who espouse a very limited role for the courts.
Their view is the courts can’t protect, can’t safeguard, won’t allow our agencies
to ensure that we’ve got protections, which really places people’s lives in peril.
It is a—considered a right-wing organization.
And in fact, the Trump administration outsourced the selection of its judges and Neil Gorsuch
to the Federalist Society and Heritage Action.
A very sad, sad phenomenon at the moment.
We also know that this president, as stated several times during the campaign, was looking
for an individual who would both expand gun rights and overturn Roe v. Wade.
So we know that the president is very assured that Neil Gorsuch will complement, will carry
out, will implement his agenda on those two things.
But there’s even more to be worried about, and that is really the ability of our government
and its agencies to provide protection for all Americans.
AMY GOODMAN: Ian Millhiser, Judge Gorsuch was a clerk for Anthony Kennedy, another Supreme
Court justice.
There was discussion that because Anthony Kennedy would feel so comfortable with Judge
Gorsuch at his side—
IAN MILLHISER: Right.
AMY GOODMAN: —that he might be more willing to retire, which would mean President Trump
chooses another Supreme Court justice.
Can you talk about this?
IAN MILLHISER: Yeah, I mean, lord, I hope not.
I mean, here’s the thing.
Anthony Kennedy is conservative, but he’s much more moderate than Neil Gorsuch.
And Anthony Kennedy does have a libertarian streak.
You know, he’s supportive of some restrictions on police.
He, you know, sometimes votes with the liberals in criminal justice cases.
I think that he is cautious about executive power, and he might be particularly cautious
about this executive’s power.
And he’s also good on gay rights.
So, when you look at Anthony Kennedy’s record, a lot of what he cares about is going to be
lost if he gives his seat to Donald Trump.
He’s not going to be giving it to Neil Gorsuch.
He’s going to be giving it to whoever Donald Trump picks.
And so, you know, I’m not a mind reader.
Only Anthony Kennedy can know what Anthony Kennedy is thinking.
But I hope that he realizes that he is the only thing standing between Donald Trump right
now and Trump being able to do more or less whatever he wants.
And if he wants to continue to be a check on this president, he needs to not give the
president his seat on the Supreme Court.
AMY GOODMAN: I also want to ask about what happened last year with Merrick Garland, President
Obama’s nominee to replace Scalia after he died.
This is President Obama speaking last March when he made the nomination.
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: I simply ask Republicans in the Senate to give him a fair hearing and
then an up-or-down vote.
If you don’t, then it will not only be an abdication of the Senate’s constitutional
duty, it will indicate a process for nominating and confirming judges that is beyond repair.
... The reputation of the Supreme Court will inevitably suffer.
Faith in our justice system will inevitably suffer.
Our democracy will ultimately suffer, as well.
AMY GOODMAN: That was President Obama last March, when he nominated Merrick Garland.
Nan Aron, the significance of what took place over this last year?
Nan?
NAN ARON: Our senators, the American people are just anguished over the mistreatment of
Merrick Garland by Republicans.
Here you had a nominee who enjoyed support from both Democrats and Republican senators,
had a moderate record.
And, in fact, not one Republican senator, during the time they blocked a hearing and
a vote, indicated that he or she had any particular criticisms of his record.
So here you had a sterling candidate with a sterling record, and yet Republicans failed
to give him a hearing, failed to give him a vote, hoping a Republican president would
be voted into office and that that president would then name his own Supreme Court justice.
And, of course, that’s exactly what happened.
But it’s important to note that not one Republican senator last year criticized anything
about Merrick Garland’s record.
So it was just simply a disgraceful, a shameful abuse of power.
And the Senate will remember it.
But it’s important to know and to note that the Senate will not act on the basis of tit-for-tat
on what happened to Merrick Garland.
That’s the past.
The Senate should be focused and will be focused on Neil Gorsuch’s record and the—whether
or not he is the proper, appropriate person to take a seat on that Supreme Court.
That is what this discussion and this debate will focus on—
AMY GOODMAN: Very quickly—
NAN ARON: —not Merrick Garland.
AMY GOODMAN: Very quickly, Ian Millhiser, on environmental issues, this Colorado jurist,
Neil Gorsuch—explain his position on Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council.
IAN MILLHISER: Yeah.
AMY GOODMAN: And also, whether you think his mother, Anne Gorsuch, who was the first woman
EPA administrator, fiercely anti-regulation—
IAN MILLHISER: Right.
AMY GOODMAN: —ultimately forced out over a corruption scandal, has relevance here?
IAN MILLHISER: Well, I mean, I am cautious about imputing the views of the mother to
the son, but when you look at Neil Gorsuch’s record, it looks like the apple did not fall
far from the tree here.
What this Chevron case is—the Chevron doctrine is basically a doctrine of modesty.
It says that courts should recognize that they’re not elected, and they should defer
to much of what the agencies do, when those agencies try to do their job.
What’s going to happen if Gorsuch succeeds in dismantling Chevron is it’s going to
shift power from the federal agencies, which are responsible to an elected president, to
the unelected judiciary, at the moment when Republicans are consolidating their control
over the judiciary.
And that means that if four years from now there’s a Democratic president, that Democratic
president could find it very hard to govern, could find it very hard to put environmental
regulations in place, very hard to put labor regulations in place, because every time they
want to do it, they have to ask permission from Neil Gorsuch.
AMY GOODMAN: And that issue of labor, his stand in cases on labor rights?
IAN MILLHISER: Well, this Chevron issue goes to virtually any subject.
I mean, if you look at how President Obama governed, largely due to gerrymandering, it
was impossible for him to take—or for Democrats to take back the House, and so he had to look
to the regulatory agencies.
And so, he tried to fight global warming through the agencies.
He tried to expand access to overtime pay through the agencies.
He tried to prevent LGBT discrimination through the agencies.
And if Gorsuch gets his way on Chevron, the next Democratic president is going to lose
all of that power, or, at the very least, is going to have to go begging for permission
to a Republican-controlled court every time they want their agencies to do some sort of
regulatory action.
AMY GOODMAN: I just wanted to read very quickly from the New York Daily News and get your
response, Ian.
"President Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court expressed disdain for apartheid protesters
in a series of columns published by a Columbia University newspaper—and one time had to
retract a fabricated story about a student activist, the Daily News has learned.
Neil Gorsuch, who was nominated by Trump on Tuesday night, graduated from the Ivy League
school"—that’s Columbia—"in 1988 with a political science degree.
While enrolled, Gorsuch penned columns for the Columbia Daily Spectator about what he
perceived as a liberal bias plaguing the student body.
In one column, Gorsuch blasted student 'coalitions' protesting American companies profiting off
of South Africa’s segregationist Apartheid system."
Now, this is when he was very young, but your thoughts on this?
IAN MILLHISER: Yeah, I mean, I am cautious about imputing the beliefs that people had
in college to who they are as an adult.
I think that if any of my college friends knew that I was appearing on this show, they
would be shocked to learn that.
So, people do change.
But when you look at Neil Gorsuch’s record, I think it’s pretty clear from how he has
behaved as an adult and as a judge, that he still holds a very conservative ideology,
and that, you know, when you look at his record from when he was in college, it’s clear
that he’s held very conservative views for a very long time.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, Ian Millhiser, I won’t ask why they would be shocked, but thank you
very much for joining us, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress Action Fund
and the editor of ThinkProgress Justice, and Nan Aron, president of Alliance for Justice.