We all are entitled to our dreams and fantasies. But Brian Williams has jumped the shark on this one. That’s not going to stop him or other radical progressives, though.
Newsbusters has the details:
After expressing his disappointment earlier in the day that Democrats had been unable to “lay a glove” on Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch during Tuesday’s Senate confirmation hearing, in MSNBC’s 3 p.m. ET hour, anchor Brian Williams tried to assuage his fellow liberals by speculating that the conservative judge might shift left while on the high court.
Here it is, in his own words.
The conversation in full:
BRIAN WILLIAMS: And Jeffrey, because you have studied the Court and written about it for so many years and in so many different venues, a question we keep asking, perhaps just to keep things interesting, what is the chance that this nominee could be a surprise to the president who nominated him, along the lines of a Brennan or a Souter?
JEFFREY ROSEN [GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL]: I don’t think that he will evolve to a Brennan or a Souter, but it is possible that Judge Gorsuch could check President Trump in a serious way. Whether it’s on the executive order and travel ban or some other form of executive overreach, Judge Gorsuch has made clear that he thinks the job of the judge is to enforce the Constitution regardless of the politics. And just as the guy he’s being appointed to replace, Justice Robert Jackson voted to check President Harry Truman in the steel seizure case. So I think in these hearings, Judge Gorsuch is making it clear, “I believe in judicial independence and I am willing to check the president who appointed me.”
WILLIAMS: This may get a little text-booky, but what Senator Klobuchar was talking about among her last points before the break was a kind of “selective originalism.” This is the kind of thing that can bedevil a justice or a nominee who is very proud to call themselves an originalist, it’s tough to apply in 2017.
Trending: New York Governor Cuomo Blames Residents Fleeing The State On The Weather
ROSEN: Absolutely. And the Democrats are right to note a series of cases where Justice Scalia, the noted originalist, seemed to betray constitutional text and history, most notable, Brown vs. Board of Education, the case that struck down segregation, but is hard to reconcile with original understanding. Judge Gorsuch responded, “I want to translate the original understanding into a world of new technologies.” And he keep citing the global positioning system surveillance case, suggesting that he is not fixed in the 18th century horse and buggy age. But the Democrats are really going to press him on this and say, “Do you agree with the cases where Justice Scalia was, as Senator Klobuchar so powerfully said, ‘a faithless originalist.’”
WILLIAMS: Do you see any reason, Jeffrey, in what we’ve seen and heard so far from Neil Gorsuch, that this won’t be a – not to diminish it in a any way – but this won’t be a net-net, basically no change on the Court from Souter to Gorsuch?
Does this sound desperate to anyone else?
Join the conversation!
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.