In the House: Filibustering Gorsuch is a mistake

Democrats are weighing whether to filibuster the confirmation of Judge Neil Gorsuch. / Photo courtesy Master Steve Rapport, Creative Commons

تجارة العملات ام تجارة الذهب الاكتتاب في اسهم عمانتل By Connor Hamill, political columnist bitcoin jak zarabiać

سعر جرام الذهب Neil Gorsuch: judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, President Donald Trump’s nominee for U.S. Supreme Court—and huge problem for Democrats. Hearings for Gorsuch have gotten under way in Congress, and they’ve put Democrats in a tight spot.

التسجيل في الفوركس

تداول الاسواق العالمية The moral dilemma facing Democrats is whether or not they can vote for Gorsuch in good faith, knowing that Republican senators denied Judge Merrick Garland the opportunity when he was nominated last year by former president Barack Obama for the same position.

تداول الذهب عن طريق الراجحي praca online w domu In an interview with NPR, Yale law professor Stephen Carter pointed to increased partisanship as a reason from the delay in Supreme Court confirmation.

موقع السوق المالية السعودية تداول

شركة اسهم شراء “There’s no question that he’s—he is qualified,” Carter said. “And in any other year with any other president, I would actually expect a fairly easy confirmation, even though he’s a very conservative Republican, but this is a very unusual political time. The nation is deeply divided.” متى وقت تداول اسهم ام القرى

arbeta hemifrån vad gäller Many Democrats believe that the current Supreme Court vacancy is a stolen seat and have vowed to oppose any nominee who isn’t Merrick Garland. The problem with this mentality is that it brings politics into a process which, in theory, should only be about finding the best person for the job.

easy forex contact details While Republicans should not be rewarded for their shamelessness, continuing to make Gorsuch’s nomination a matter of politics rather than principle sets a dangerous precedent. Both parties should be reminded that their main focus should be getting a qualified individual on the court.

توصيات مجانية للعملات As much as it pains me to say it, the simple fact that Gorsuch isn’t Garland is not a good enough reason to refuse him a seat. Unless Democrats truly believe that Gorsuch will be a detriment to our country, this is a fight that I think Democrats should concede. As former first lady Michelle Obama once said, “Our motto is: When they go low, we go high.”

valutahandel video It would be shameless for the Democrats to filibuster Gorsuch’s nomination for such an arbitrary reason, and they would be no better than the Republicans. تداول مباشر الاسهم السعودية It’s also worth mentioning that Gorsuch is replacing former Justice Antonin Scalia, a conservative judge, so Gorsuch’s nomination wouldn’t even change the political makeup of the court.

forex jobs in banks There just simply isn’t enough at stake for Democrats to filibuster Gorsuch, and it would be more prudent for them to devote their time and energy to other matters.

Leave a Reply

هنا تداول الذهب You must be logged in to post a comment.