Senate Republicans went “nuclear” on Thursday by killing the filibuster as it relates to Supreme Court nominees. The move paves the way for Donald Trump’s nominee Neil Gorsuch to fill the vacancy left by the late Antonin Scalia. A vacancy many people, myself included, believe should have been filled by Merrick Garland — though that’s a topic for another article.
Nevertheless, Gorsuch is going to become our next Supreme Court Justice.
To be honest, I opposed the idea of Democrats using the filibuster in this instance because I knew Republicans would simply get rid of it and, ultimately, it wouldn’t accomplish anything. At the end of the day, this was a “fight” Democrats couldn’t win. And, just like I figured, Democrats filibustered the pick, Republicans “nuked” the filibuster, and Gorsuch now has a clear path to the Supreme Court.
However, while I wasn’t behind the idea of using the filibuster, I did recently express my opinion on why I felt Gorsuch shouldn’t be confirmed. Not just because I believe this selection was stolen from Barack Obama, but because I don’t think any president under investigation for possibly committing treason should be allowed to make major decisions that directly impact this country until they’re cleared of those charges. Obviously, being allowed to select a Supreme Court Justice qualifies as a fairly major decision.
It seems many people felt this same way, including George Takei who perfectly summarized why Gorsuch shouldn’t be allowed on the Supreme Court:
Gorsuch will be an illegitimate justice named by an illegitimate president. If Trump colluded with Russia, his appointments won't count.
— George Takei (@GeorgeTakei) April 6, 2017
Takei’s tweet brings up the point I’ve been trying to make for the last few weeks.
What if a few months from now it’s determined that Trump is a traitor who betrayed this country by colluding with an enemy? Couldn’t it be argued (as it should be) that Gorsuch is, in fact, an illegitimate Justice considering he was appointed by a traitor? Would we really want a Justice to remain on the Court who was put there by a traitor to the United States?
It wouldn’t matter Gorsuch had nothing to do with Trump’s possible treason. It would be the fact that Trump colluded with an enemy on his way to “winning” last November, granting him the power to fill Scalia’s position, power that he was given, mostly, because he was working with an enemy who attacked us.
This is why, even beyond the Supreme Court situation, I’ve argued that Trump should have his powers vastly reduced until he’s cleared of these charges. The chaos that we might be heading toward if he does happen to replace a Supreme Court Justice; pass massive tax reform, repeal Obamacare; start a war in Syria; make massive cuts to departments like the EPA, and sign other major legislative decisions — then be found guilty of treason — is something I can’t even imagine dealing with.
We’re currently facing something unlike we’ve ever dealt with before. While Trump, his supporters, and the GOP continue to downplay these Russian allegations, that doesn’t change the fact that we could very well have a traitor living in the White House and everything he’s doing is being done as someone who betrayed this country by colluding with Russia to undermine our democracy.
Which means, as George Takei perfectly stated, we could be facing a very near future where we’re arguing that Neil Gorsuch’s appointment is invalid because it was made by a traitor.
Latest posts by Allen Clifton (see all)
- Trump’s Biggest ‘Accomplishment’ is Taking Credit for Obama’s Economy - January 19, 2018
- A Message to Any Fool Trying to Blame Democrats for a Possible Government Shutdown - January 19, 2018
- Donald Trump Should Be Embarrassed After Farcical ‘Fake News Awards’ Spectacularly Backfire - January 19, 2018