Live blog of confirmation hearing | March 21, 2017
-
Gorsuch: I have heard a lot about it from you, and others.
-
Gorsuch: I know that there is a lot of money being spent by both sides.
-
Two #StopGorsuch
shirt-wearers are now in the audience. -
Whitehouse: Does it matter whether the public knows who is contributing?
-
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) is now questioning Gorsuch, with an early focus on "dark money."
-
Gorsuch: I recognize that it's a matter of First Amendment interests. Supreme Court has validated that disclosure serves important interests, but can also sometimes have unintended consequences.
-
Gorsuch: Disclosure can also be used as a weapon to silence speech.
-
Whitehouse: Here's a live example right now. Re the $10 million being spent on your confirmation, should committee know who is behind that?
-
Whitehouse: You could ask people to declare themselves, as a courtesy.
-
Gorsuch: It would be a politics question. And I am not going to get involved in politics.
-
Whitehouse: You really think Supreme Court doesn't get involved in politics -- see, e.g., Citizens United.
-
Gorsuch: What I mean to suggest is that every justice is trying to apply First Amendment and the laws of this country faithfully. Judges make half the people unhappy half of the time.
-
Whitehouse: This is more like 90% unhappy with Citizens United.
-
[I think Gorsuch has already used the "half the people unhappy 100% of the time" line once already too. But it has been a slow Hamilton afternoon so far. ]
-
Gorsuch: I wrote an 800-page book about precedent. It makes a great doorstop. I got a really bad deal on royalties.
-
Whitehouse: If a recusal question were to come up, how would we know whether partiality question had been adequately addressed if we did not know who was spending all this money to get you confirmed?
-
Whitehouse: Kind of odd to be sitting here with a $10 million spend for you and no idea who is behind it.
-
Gorsuch: Not sure what the question is. There's a lot about the confirmation process today that I regret. A lot.
-
Gorsuch: Byron White was here for 90 minutes. He smoked cigarettes through the hearing. I regret putting my family through this.
-
Gorsuch: It is what it is, and it's this body that makes the laws. If you, Congress, want more disclosures, pass a law and courts will enforce.
-
Whitehouse: Talking about antitrust laws and values that a judge can pursue.
-
Gorsuch: A judge applying antitrust law looks to precedent.
-
Whitehouse: A lower court judge. If it's at the Supreme Court, it's a new question and you can't look to precedent.
-
Gorsuch: The precise question may be new, but still need to look at precedent.
-
[Whitehouse is getting a little testy with Gorsuch, but Gorsuch remains unflustered. Whitehouse doesn't seem to be getting traction with this line of questioning. Gorsuch is blaming the legislators again.]
-
Whitehouse: Should we not be concerned about influence of dark money? This is taking a lot of time to get what should be a simple answer.
-
Gorsuch: Not simple at all. I'd need to go through the whole judicial process, read the briefs, etc.
-
Whitehouse reminds Gorsuch that Citizens United did overrule a law that Congress had enacted.
-
Whitehouse changes topics slightly. You said you knew Garland.
-
Gorsuch: I do, although wouldn't claim as close personal friend.
-
Whitehouse: How would you characterize your differences with Garland?
-
[The questions do now seem to be getting to Gorsuch a bit.] He says: I don't like people to characterize me, and I am not going to characterize them.
-
Whitehouse: What do these groups see in you that makes you worth the money?
Submit Event
