The Latest: Feinstein to vote No on Gorsuch Nomination

[n2doc]

Source: AP

Senator Dianne Feinstein says she will vote against the nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court.

The California Democrat cited two cases in which, she says, Gorsuch inserted his own view of what the law should be. In one case Gorsuch sided with a trucking company over a fired trucker who refused to drive a disabled truck in subzero weather. In the other case, Gorsuch sided with a school district that denied services to a student with autism.

Feinstein also says she is troubled that Gorsuch refused to say whether he supports the outcome of Brown v. Board of Education, the court decision that ended racial segregation in public schools.

Feinstein is the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is voting Monday on Gorsuch's nomination.

Read more: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SENATE_SUPREME_COURT_THE_LATEST_COOL-?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-04-03-10-48-44

[ananda]

1. Good!

Do we have 41 yet?

[mwooldri]

8. She's 38...

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/27/politics/neil-gorsuch-whip-list/

Has not been updated at time of writing to include Feinstein. This had 37 on it.

7 left to decide. 2 strong lean no on confirmation, so maybe they go for the filibuster.

methinks Repubs will change the rules, but only to the number of votes they have, i.e lower threshold but not to simple majority.

[YOHABLO]

2. Let's all pray he gets turned down.

[shenmue]

3. Yay

[iluvtennis]

7. +++

[ailsagirl]

4. Well, I would hope so

[MBS]

5. Excellent!

She's been extra feisty lately - glad to see this side of her!

[femmocrat]

6. Also Mark Warner!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10028887150

[Sunlei]

9. Judge Gorsuch refused to answer who his backers are, like he's not proud of who they are.

Deception like that by Gorsuch means the man needs a much longer time for his ENTIRE background to be revealed. Why isn't he proud of whoever? what groups are backing him? vote NO.

Republicans blocked Garland for a year and he shared his entire history with ALL Americans. Many, many Federal Court decisions Garland is happy to discuss openly.

[dalton99a]

10. Excellent.

[harun]

11. DiFi, I am impressed.

[harun]

12. Is this voting no to allow a vote? or voting no once that happens?

[CousinIT]

13. THANK HER...

...@SenFeinstein on Twitter.

[Pachamama]

14. Brava to my Senator!!

[Posting Anonymously]

15. Reminds Me of a Robot

Gorsuch reminds me of a robot, the only difference being that most robots have sufficient flexibility to perform new and unique tasks. Gorsuch on the other hand was PERMANENTLY programmed to function within a very narrow band and consequently he is so simple minded he can't accommodate aspects of social life that he wasn't programmed to deal with such as what to if you see a person who is about to freeze to death. It's no coincidence his mother was that reckless, mindless idiot who tried to destroy the EPA, that is Gorsuch's narrow mindedness is simply a genetic artifact.

[niyad]

16. he supports hobby lobby v siebelius as well. he is NO friend to women.

[niyad]

17. as one commentator put it, he is a nice face on an ugly ideology.

[Honeycombe8]

18. Yay. Coons made 41. They passed the threshold for a filibuster. If that's a good idea

I don't know if that's a good idea. But the constituents demand it, and the Dems are ticked about Garland and about Gorsuch not fully and straightforwardly answering questions.

Republicans WILL use the nuclear option, McConnell said. They are dug in that they WILL give Trump a win in his first 100 days, and they WILL get Gorsuch.

The bad news is: If the Senators change the rules to need only a majority, then that will be a rule for the next Justice, which may well come before 2020, since Ginsburg is so old, now, and not in good health. (I was hoping she'd retire during Obama's admin., but she didn't.)

[n2doc]

19. It also means that when we take back the WH and senate, we can nominate a more liberal Justice

Since we won't need to get to 60 either.

And quite frankly, the Republicans have promised to nuke the filibuster if they are stopped on any SCOTUS nomination. Do you honestly believe they won't nominate another soul-less scum for the next opening also?

[Honeycombe8]

20. True. IF Ginsburg doesn't resign or pass away or fall ill before then. (She's 84.)

She'll be 88 in 2020. And she's had a couple of bouts with cancer and other illnesses. I think it's more likely she won't make it to 2020 than she will. But she's tough, so there IS a chance.

I can't say the filibuster is wrong, though. At some point, the Dems need to stand up and be an opposing party.

[n2doc]

21. Doesn't matter if she does or doesn't as far as the filibuster is concerned

Republicans will nominate a rw scum if she has to resign, no matter what. And nuke the filibuster to get their way. That have promised to.

[yurbud]

22. will she filibuster?