By Tom Quiner
Senator Diane Feinstein in 2006:
“…I think when it comes to filibustering a Supreme Court appointment, you really have to have something out there–whether it’s gross moral turpitude or something that comes to the surface. Now, I mean, this is a man I might disagree with. That doesn’t mean he shouldn’t be on the court.”
Senator Diane Feinstein today:
“I had hoped Judge Gorsuch would better explain his judicial philosophies and personal views at this hearing.”
Ms. Feinstein’s views have evidently ‘evolved.’ She has joined most of her Democratic caucus in preparing to filibuster Judge Gorsuch. There’s no gross moral turpitude at issue. It is his personal views that bothers her, or rather, that he refuses to share them.
The reason he doesn’t share them is his personal views are irrelevant. He decides cases based on how the law is written, not on his own personal opinions, something liberals can’t relate to.
Even more, if his personal opinions don’t align with liberals, and they probably don’t, he won’t be confirmed should he dare express them.
Damned if you do; damned if you don’t.
Senate minority leader, Chuck Schumer, has imposed a new standard on Republican nominees: 60 votes, rather than 50, are needed to confirm Supreme Court judges, since he promises a filibuster.
The “Schumcr Doctrine” and Senator Feinstein’s flip flop are the latest signs of the evolving value system of the Democratic Party.