Orrin Hatch: “in a little more than 2 weeks, the Judiciary Committee will open its hearing on the nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch for…”

“in a little more than 2 weeks, the Judiciary Committee will open its hearing on the nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch for the U.S. Supreme Court. This is the 14th Supreme Court confirmation process in which I have participated. Over that time, while some things have changed, others have stayed the same. The conflict over judicial appointments, especially to the Supreme Court, remains at its core a conflict over the proper role of judges in our system of government. The two sides of this conflict want two very different kinds of judges. Some of my colleagues, joined by their liberal allies, instead want judges who owe their fidelity to a particular political agenda. For them, the judiciary is simply a backup plan for achieving political objectives. If the legislative branch does not deliver, they go to the executive--as they often did in the previous administration. If that does not work, they figure that the courts offer a second or third bite at the political apple. This vision is fundamentally inconsistent with the way our system of government was destined, designed, and intended to be. Instead, the Framers devised the role of the judiciary on the wisdom of Montesquieu, who posited: Were the power of judging joined with the legislative, the life and liberty of the subject would be exposed to arbitrary control. . . . Were it joined to the executive power, the judge might behave [as] an oppressor. That was Montesquieu.…”