On the recordMarch 22, 2017
yesterday Judge Neil Gorsuch went through over 11 hours of questioning in the Judiciary Committee. As expected, he used the opportunity to speak at length about his knowledge of case law, hiding behind precedents rather than giving an impression of his actual views. As expected, his supporters are saying that Judge Gorsuch was erudite, polished, homespun. But none of this matters compared to the real purpose of hearings: to find out a nominee's views and what kind of judge he will be, not how his repartee from the bench will sound. For 11 hours, Judge Gorsuch looked like he was playing dodgeball with the Senate Judiciary Committee, bending over backward to avoid revealing anything that might constitute a judicial philosophy or give hints about his approach to the legal issues of our day. Those, to me, are far more important than any superficial impressions he may have left. He dodged questions on previous cases like Citizens United, Rowe v. Wade, and Brown v. Board. He dodged general questions on dark money in politics, LGBTQ rights, and the constitutionality of a Muslim ban. He did manage to wax poetic on the significance of a judge's robe and the humility it brings. He said it reminds us that ``ours is a judiciary of honest black polyester.'' Well, if he were truly humbled, he would realize the augustness of this position and answer questions directly.…





