On the recordApril 4, 2017
there are few moments in the life of a nation when the people are presented with a single choice that directly affects what equality before the law will mean for the next generation. The opportunity to grant a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court of the United States is one of those moments. The next Supreme Court Justice will break the 4- to-4 deadlock that has constrained the Court since the passing of Justice Scalia and this body's unprecedented refusal to act on Chief Judge Merrick Garland's nomination to fill that vacancy during the final year of President Obama's second term. Before discussing the pending nominee's merits, we must consider this nomination in its historical context. Chief Judge Garland, I believe, was one of the most qualified nominees for the Supreme Court in generations. After meeting with him and reviewing his record, I had no doubt that he easily would have earned bipartisan support and cleared the 60-vote threshold, as did each of President Obama's prior nominees to the Court. Yet my colleagues on the other side of the aisle refused even to meet with him. His treatment was disgraceful. Rejecting the treatment Chief Judge Garland received, I met with Judge Neil Gorsuch and shared a thoughtful conversation. I found him to be intelligent and articulate but at the same time, he was not particularly forthcoming about his judicial record, which contains many distressing examples of inconsistency and ideological rigidity.…





