Neil Gorsuch SCOTUS nominee


Woo hoo,Colorado born and raised,Neil,Gorsuch,SCOTUS nominee.
Good choice President Trump!:us:


As was Merrick Garland a year ago.


Congratulations my American friends, he seems like a top notch pick. Now it’s only a matter of getting him appointed. If he does, he’ll be a great replacement to Antonin Scalia.


With just a quick glance at his stances, he doesn’t seem too awful.



He isn’t awful at all!:wink:


And now my vote and support for the president has been vindicated!




He would be a lonely Episcopalian in a group of Jews and Catholics.


Why? It sounds like the start of a good joke. :slight_smile:

Seriously, Neil Gorsuch is good news for the country.


He seems like a good pick.


I reserve my opinion due to the test of time.


His record is strict originalist. And it sounds like he will probably make it through ok - I believe up to seven Democrats have signaled they might go for him, in states Trump won. He does seem qualified and pretty uncontroversial. Of course we do have the protesting already starting: THE END OF DEMOCRACY: IMPENDING THEOCRATIC TAKEOVER: NOT MY SUPREME COURT JUSTICE.


Apparently Judge Gorsuch has not been involved in too many high-profile controversial cases, likely not a coincidence at that will likely provide for a smoother confirmation process. But one of the cases he WAS involved in, and how he ruled, should be especially heartening for many at CAF:

(link from the Daily News article linked by AClaire11)

Beyond abortion, one of his highest profile cases, Hobby Lobby Stores v. Sebelius, centered on access to contraception and plaintiffs’ religious views.

The case, where Gorsuch sided with Hobby Lobby, eventually went to the Supreme Court and ruled that businesses should not be mandated to provide contraceptive insurance coverage for employees if the owners decided it violated their freedom of religion.

ETA: I also think it’s not a coincidence that he’s one of the youngest men ever nominated to the SC, at age 49. Obviously Trump wants to make a decision that will have effects long after he leaves office.


Yes, I hope the Bishops chime in on this nomination too! Not gonna hold my breath though. Just in an abundance of caution.


I was no fan of Obama, but Merrick Garland should have been considered.

Mitch McConnell needs to be voted out.


Wow at this statement from the Solicitor General under President Obama, Neal Katyal:


I agree.Not a fan…


But we can use at least one Protestant for diversity. Gorsuch has stellar legal credentials having trained at Columbia, Harvard, and Oxford, is a brilliant jurist, and a very good pick on the part of Trump despite his being conservative. He may turn out to be an important swing vote.


Considering the politics of obstruction practiced by the Republicans in refusing to even hold hearings for Obama’s nominee Merrick Garland, Democrats should filibuster Gorsuch and prevent him from being confirmed even if they have to do it for four years. When it looked like Clinton was going to win, Republicans also said they would never confirm any person she might nominate to the Supreme Court. Obstruction can be used by both sides. If Republicans abolish the filibuster, that will be on them and they will have to live with it later when they are in the minority again.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit