On the recordFebruary 15, 2017
To be sure, that Justice Gorsuch would be a fierce defender of the separation of powers does not mean his rulings will match his policy preferences. As Justice Scalia wisely remarked, good and faithful judges will not always like the conclusions they reach in interpreting the law. And it certainly does not mean that his rulings will match my policy preferences or those of my colleagues. As I have repeatedly stated on this floor over decades, that is not the proper inquiry when we assess the qualifications of a nominee to the Federal bench. Federal judges must be judges, not super-legislators. The bottom line is, even a casual review of Judge Gorsuch's opinions should eliminate any concerns my colleagues may have concerning Judge Gorsuch's commitment to the Constitution's separation of powers. Any review would lead to that conclusion. In his opinions, Judge Gorsuch has resisted executive branch efforts to make laws as opposed to merely enforcing those laws. Judge Gorsuch's opinions and other writings make the compelling case for separation of powers in a way that finds few rivals on the current Federal bench. If my colleagues are truly concerned about the proper separation of powers between the three branches of government, there is a simple solution: Confirm Judge Gorsuch as an Associate Justice on the United States Supreme Court.
