Why do Michigan's Democratic senators oppose Neil Gorsuch?

WASHINGTON, D.C. (WLUC) - Michigan's U.S. Senators both announced last week that they would oppose Neil Gorsuch. Below are statements from Sen. Gary Peters and Sen. Debbie Stabenow explaining why they won't vote for President Donald Trump's nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court.

U.S. Sen. Gary Peters, D-Michigan:

“The U.S. Supreme Court is a pillar of our nation’s democracy, and I take very seriously the Senate’s responsibility to advise and consent on nominees to serve in this revered institution. The U.S. Supreme Court is often the last line of defense for everyday Americans, and Judge Gorsuch’s previous rulings indicate he believes that corporations have greater rights than individuals. Whether it is ruling against children who want an equal opportunity to get a quality education or women who want access to health care, Judge Gorsuch often fails to take into account the human face behind each case. He has also failed to acknowledge how deeply the Citizens United decision has corrupted our government by opening the floodgates for special interest money to pour into our elections. Serving on the U.S. Supreme Court requires more than education and experience, and I am extremely concerned that Judge Gorsuch’s judicial approach is out of step with mainstream American values. After careful consideration of Judge Gorsuch’s comments and his record, I cannot support his nomination to serve on our nation’s highest court.”

U.S. Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Michigan:

“The Senate has a Constitutional duty to provide advice and consent on Judge Neil Gorsuch’s nomination through a fair and thorough confirmation process. It is essential that the next Supreme Court Justice not only be qualified in the law but also balanced and impartial in his views.

“After reviewing Judge Gorsuch's rulings, it is clear that he has a long record of siding with special interests and institutions instead of hard-working Americans. And, therefore, in my judgment, he does not meet this standard of balance and impartiality.

“While serving on the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, Judge Gorsuch ruled against Alphonse Maddin, a truck driver from Michigan who was fired for leaving his trailer on the side of the road after breaking down on a cold night and fearing he would freeze to death. When Mr. Maddin sued, Judge Gorsuch disagreed with six other judges' rulings and reached the conclusion that Mr. Maddin should have risked his life to follow company orders even though Mr. Maddin protected his cargo from loss and completed his assignment.

“Additionally, in 2008, Judge Gorsuch ruled against the parent of a severely autistic boy, Luke, who sought an education that would meet his special needs. Yet during Judge Gorsuch's confirmation hearing, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that disabled students are entitled to more protections than Judge Gorsuch had found to be necessary for a quality education. And in another important case, Judge Gorsuch ruled in favor of the rights of corporations over the rights of women to have access to health care.

“After carefully reviewing his record and listening to his testimony last week in the Senate Judiciary Committee, I have concluded that supporting the nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to the United States Supreme Court is not in the best interests of the people of Michigan whom I am proud to represent.”

Comments are posted from viewers like you and do not always reflect the views of this station. powered by Disqus