That is what their argument has come down to. The Democratic minority leader has been down on the floor for a
speech, and I will quote from his speech. He said: ``I saw a judge who
repeatedly decided with insurance companies that
wanted to deny disability benefits to employees.''
The Democratic leader goes on to say: ``I saw a judge who, in
unemployment discrimination, sided with employers the great majority of
the time.''
Here is another quote: ``Time and time again, his rulings favor the
already powerful over ordinary Americans.''
The Democratic leader went on to marvel: ``Judge Gorsuch ruled
against a teacher.'' ``Judge Gorsuch ruled against a truck driver.''
Now, even if you set aside the fact that the facts in these cases
have been wildly distorted in the retelling that I have heard, and if
you set aside the fact that even in those very cases in which Judge
Gorsuch has ruled, often he has ruled with the Democratic judges who
enjoy the support of our Democratic colleagues, and even if you ignore
the fact that in many of these cases he was bound by precedent--he had
no choice--you could also ignore all the many other cases in which
Judge Gorsuch ruled in favor of workers and unions and people who
allege sexual harassment, environmentalists, immigrants, and other
sympathetic litigants. The minority leader put all that aside. I think
we have to ask a fundamental question: What is missing in this critique
of Judge Gorsuch's decisions?
Keywords matched
immigrants