Trump picks conservative judge Neil Gorsuch for Supreme Court

February 1, 2017

Washington, Feb 1: US President Donald Trump has nominated young federal appeals court judge Neil Gorsuch for the high-profile job on the Supreme Court, elevating a jurist who could cement the court's conservative bent and help shape the American legal establishment for decades, including on divisive issues such as gun control and religious rights.

trump

Gorsuch, 49, is the youngest Supreme Court nominee in a quarter century and is Trump's pick to fill a vacancy caused by the death of conservative Justice Antonin Scalia nearly a year ago.

Gorsuch's nomination underscores the fast-rising conservative's potential to shape major decisions for decades to come on major divisive issues such as abortion, gun control, the death penalty and religious rights.

"I am proud to announce the nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch for Justice of the Supreme Court," Trump said in a televised prime-time event from the East Room of the White House.

"Judge Gorsuch has outstanding legal skills, a brilliant mind, tremendous discipline and has earned bipartisan support," Trump said adding, "It is an extraordinary resume — as good as it gets."

Born and raised in Colorado, Gorsuch attended Columbia University and Harvard Law School and after graduating with honours, he received his doctorate from the Oxford University as a Marshall Scholar.

Gorsuch is seen as an "originalist" who believes in the American Constitution's original intent and meaning.

"Judge Gorsuch has a superb intellect, an unparallelled legal education, and a commitment to interpreting the Constitution according to its text. He will make an incredible Justice as soon as the Senate confirms him," Trump said.

Making his first nomination to the Supreme Court, Trump also said that he was fulfilling his promise to select someone who loves the Constitution and respects laws and will interpret them as written.

In 2006, then President George W Bush nominated Gorsuch for the US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, and he was confirmed by voice vote without objection.

"I am honoured and humbled to receive this nomination. I look forward to meeting with Senators over the coming weeks as we begin this process," Gorsuch said.

Outlining his legal ideas, Gorsuch said: "It is the rule of judges to apply, not alter, the work of the people's representatives. A judge who likes every outcome he reaches is very likely a bad judge."

He also praised Justice Scalia as "a lion of the law."

Trump said he hoped both Democrats and Republicans can come together for once for the good of the country. But some Democrats have vowed to mount a vigorous challenge to nearly any nominee to what they view as the court's "stolen seat."

"This may be the most transparent judicial selection process in history," Trump said, adding "the qualifications of Judge Gorsuch are beyond dispute."

As a young man, Gorsuch delivered papers and worked as a front desk clerk at a Howard Johnson to make extra money. Now, he enjoys fishing, hiking and skiing. He and his wife care for animals, including a horse, in the small barn at their home.

The silver-haired jurist is known for writing incisive rulings, advocacy for court review of government regulations and defence of religious freedom.

If confirmed, Gorsuch's appointment could have a major impact on abortion, gender rights and gun control issues. Although Republicans hold 52 seats in the Senate, they need 60 to confirm a nominee.

"I pledge that if I am confirmed I will do all my powers permit to be a faithful servant of the Constitution and laws of this great country," Gorsuch said.

He said the Supreme Court's work is vital to protect the people's liberties under law and to the "continuity of our Constitution, the greatest charter of human liberty the world has ever known."

House Speaker Paul Ryan said in Gorsuch, Trump fulfilled his pledge to nominate a judge who has demonstrated loyalty to the Constitution. "He is a phenomenal nominee for the Supreme Court."

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy said Congress and the American people don't want a liberal Supreme Court justice or a conservative Supreme Court justice. "We want a justice who will decide cases based on the law and the Constitution as they are written. Neil Gorsuch appears to fit that mold."

The Democrats, however, voiced their opposition.

"Given his record, I have very serious doubts about Judge Gorsuch's ability to meet this standard. Judge Gorsuch has repeatedly sided with corporations over working people, demonstrated a hostility toward women's rights, and most troubling, hewed to an ideological approach to jurisprudence that makes me sceptical that he can be a strong, independent Justice on the Court," said Senate minority leader Charles Schumer.

"Make no mistake, Senate Democrats will not simply allow but require an exhaustive, robust, and comprehensive debate on Judge Gorsuch's fitness to be a Supreme Court Justice," he said, adding that the Senate must insist upon 60-votes for any Supreme Court nominee, a bar that was met by each of President Barack Obama's nominees.

Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy said he had hoped that Trump would work in a bipartisan way to pick a mainstream nominee like Merrick Garland and bring the country together.

"Instead, he outsourced this process to far-right interest groups. This is no way to treat a co-equal branch of government, or to protect the independence of our federal judiciary," he said.

National Abortion Federation in a statement expressed its disappointment. "We need a Supreme Court justice who will honour established precedent, including the constitutional right to privacy and Roe v Wade. That Justice is not Neil Gorsuch," said its president and CEO Vicki Saporta.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
January 22,2020

Davos, Jan 22: President Donald Trump has said that the US is watching the developments between India and Pakistan over Kashmir "very closely" and repeated his offer to "help" resolve the longstanding dispute between the two neighbours as he met Prime Minister Imran Khan on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum here in the Swiss ski resort.

Addressing the media with the Pakistan Prime Minister prior to their private meeting on Tuesday, President Trump asserted that trade and borders were both critical points for discussion, while Khan said that for him, Afghanistan was the top priority.

Trump told Khan, whom he referred to as "my friend", that he would speak to Prime Minister Narendra Modi about the ongoing Kashmir issue. The US president is expected to visit India in the coming weeks, marking his first visit after taking up his post in the White House.

"What's going on between Pakistan and India … if we can help, we certainly will be willing to. We have been watching it very closely and it's an honour to be here with my friend," he said.

"The Pakistan-India conflict is a very big issue for us in Pakistan and we expect the US to always play its part in deescalating the tensions, because no other country can," Khan said.

President Trump has repeatedly offered to mediate following India's August 5 decision to revoke the special status to Jammu and Kashmir and bifurcate the state into two Union Territories, evoking strong reaction from Pakistan which has been trying to internationalise the Kashmir issue.

New Delhi has defended the move, saying Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India and the issue was strictly internal to the country, and the special status provisions only gave rise to terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir.

"The country took the decision of abrogation of Article 370, which had only given separatism and terrorism to that state," Prime Minister Narendra Modi said at a function in October last year.

This is the third meeting between Trump and Khan since Pakistan premier assumed office in 2018 and it came against the backdrop of Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi's recent trip to the US, amid reports that the US and Afghan Taliban were close to striking a peace deal.

"There are issues we want to talk about. The main issue is Afghanistan because it concerns the US and Pakistan. Fortunately, we are on the same page. Both of us are interested in peace there and an orderly transition in Afghanistan with talks with Taliban and the government," Khan said.

When a reporter asked Trump if he would visit Pakistan considering he was already set to visit India, the US president said he was meeting the Pakistan premier in Davos.

"Well, we're visiting right now. So we don't really have to. I wanted to say that from a relationship standpoint, we got a great relationship. From the standpoint our two countries, we're getting along very well. I would say we've never been closer with Pakistan the way we're right now. And this is a big statement," Trump said.

Khan left for Switzerland to attend the World Economic Forum and meet the world leaders, including President Trump, on the sidelines of the annual event which kicked off at the ski resort town of Davos on Tuesday.

The four-day summit marks the 50th anniversary of the forum.

A total of 53 heads of State are on the guest list. Nearly 3,000 participants from 118 countries are expected to attend the event during which political leaders, business executives, heads of international organisations and civil society representatives are set to deliberate on contemporary economic, geopolitical, social and environmental issues.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
July 21,2020

Washington, Jul 21: Some half-a-dozen influential Republican lawmakers on Monday introduced a legislation in the Senate to allow Americans to sue China in federal court for its role in causing the coronavirus pandemic.

The Civil Justice for Victims of Covid Act gives federal courts authority to hear claims that China has caused or substantially contributed to the Covid-19 pandemic.

Introduced by senators Martha McSally, Marsha Blackburn, Tom Cotton, Josh Hawley, Mike Rounds and Thom Tillis, the bill strips China of its sovereign immunity for reckless actions that caused the pandemic and creates a cause of action. It also authorises federal courts to freeze Chinese assets.

The legislation is closely modelled after the 2016 Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA) that gave more legal remedies to victims of terrorism, particularly the 9/11 victims.

“Americans who have been victimised by the lies and deceit of the Chinese Communist Party-to include those who lost loved ones, suffered business losses, or were personally harmed due to Covid-19-deserve the opportunity to hold China accountable and to demand just compensation,” McSally said.

As the death toll and financial losses of Covid-19 mount, China should be forced to pay the costs of these damages to the American people, he said.

Blackburn said that China's Communist Party must face consequences for concealing and now profiting off the Covid-19 pandemic they enabled.

“The costs are devastating: trillions of dollars in economic damage, millions of American jobs lost, and over a half million deaths worldwide – and counting. Business owners and families who have lost loved ones deserve justice,” he said.

By silencing doctors and journalists who tried to warn the world about the coronavirus, the Chinese Communist Party allowed the virus to spread quickly around the globe, Cotton said, adding their decision to cover up the virus led to thousands of needless deaths and untold economic harm.

Rounds said that China must be held accountable for its failure to contain Covid-19 and alleged that the country's delay in sharing the seriousness of the virus with the rest of the world isn't just negligence— it is criminal in nature.

“If China would have been transparent from the start, many more lives would have been saved in all parts of the world. Our legislation provides the tools necessary for American citizens to sue the Chinese Communist Party in federal court for financial losses incurred because of Covid-19,” he said.

Tillis alleged that the Chinese Communist Party lied to the world about Covid-19 and allowed it to become a global pandemic, causing many Americans to tragically lose their loved ones and face immense financial hardship.

“The American people deserve the right to hold the Chinese government accountable for its malicious actions, and I'm proud to join my colleagues in introducing this commonsense bill,” he said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 9,2020

Wuhan, Feb 9: President Xi Jinping strode onstage before an adoring audience in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing less than three weeks ago, trumpeting his successes in steering China through a tumultuous year and promising "landmark" progress in 2020.

"Every single Chinese person, every member of the Chinese nation, should feel proud to live in this great era," he declared to applause on the day before the Lunar New Year holiday. "Our progress will not be halted by any storms and tempests."

Xi made no mention of a dangerous new coronavirus that had already taken tenacious hold in the country. As he spoke, the government was locking down Wuhan, a city of 11 million people, in a frantic attempt to stop the virus spreading from its epicenter.

The coronavirus epidemic, which has killed more than 800 people in China as of Sunday and sickened tens of thousands, comes as Xi has struggled with a host of other challenges: a slowing economy, huge protests in Hong Kong, an election in Taiwan that rebuffed Beijing and a protracted trade war with the United States.

Now Xi faces an accelerating health crisis that is also a political one: a profound test of the authoritarian system he has built around himself over the past seven years. As the Chinese government struggles to contain the virus amid rising public discontent with its performance, the changes that Xi has ushered in could make it difficult for him to escape blame.

"It’s a big shock to the legitimacy of the ruling party. I think it could be only second to the June 4 incident of 1989. It’s that big," said Rong Jian, a writer about politics in Beijing, referring to the armed crackdown on Tiananmen Square protesters that year.

"There’s no doubt about his control over power," he added, "but the manner of control and its consequences have hurt his legitimacy and reputation."

Xi himself has recognized what is at stake, calling the outbreak "a major test of China’s system and capacity for governance."

Yet as China’s battle with the coronavirus intensified, Xi put the country’s No. 2 leader, Li Keqiang, in charge of a leadership group handling the emergency, effectively turning him into the public face of the government’s response. It was Li Keqiang who traveled to Wuhan to visit doctors.

Xi, by contrast, receded from public view for several days. That was not without precedent, though it stood out in this crisis, after previous Chinese leaders had used times of disaster to try to show a more common touch. State television and newspapers almost always lead with fawning coverage of Xi’s every move.

That retreat from the spotlight, some analysts said, signaled an effort by Xi to insulate himself from a campaign that may falter and draw public ire. Yet Xi has consolidated power, sidelining or eliminating rivals, so there are few people left to blame when something goes wrong.

"Politically, I think he is discovering that having total dictatorial power has a downside, which is that when things go wrong or have a high risk of going wrong, then you also have to bear all the responsibility," said Victor Shih, an associate professor at the University of California San Diego who studies Chinese politics.

Much of the country’s population has been told to stay at home, factories remain closed, and airlines have cut service. Experts warn that the coronavirus could slam the economy if not swiftly contained.

The government is also having trouble controlling the narrative. Xi now faces unusually sharp public discontent that even China’s rigorous censorship apparatus has been unable to stifle entirely.

The death of an ophthalmologist in Wuhan, Dr. Li Wenliang, who was censured for warning his medical school classmates of the spread of a dangerous new disease in December, has unleashed a torrent of pent-up public grief and rage over the government’s handling of the crisis. Chinese academics have launched at least two petitions in the wake of Li’s death, each calling for freedom of speech.

State media still portray Xi as ultimately in control, and there’s no sign that he faces a serious challenge from within the party leadership. The crisis, though, has already tainted China’s image as an emerging superpower — efficient, stable and strong — that could eventually rival the United States.

How much the crisis might erode Xi’s political standing remains to be seen, but it could weaken his position in the long run as he prepares to take a likely third term as Communist Party general secretary in 2022.

In 2018, Xi won approval to remove the constitutional limits on his term as the country’s president, making his plan for another five-year term seem all but certain.

If Xi comes out of this crisis politically insecure, the consequences are unpredictable. He may become more open to compromise within the party elite. Or he may double down on the imperious ways that have made him China’s most powerful leader in generations.

"Xi’s grip on power is not light," said Jude Blanchette, the Freeman Chair in China Studies at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

"While the ham-fisted response to this crisis undoubtedly adds a further blemish to Xi’s tenure in office," Blanchette added, "the logistics of organizing a leadership challenge against him remain formidable."

In recent days, despite a dearth of public appearances, state media have portrayed Xi as a tireless commander-in-chief. This week they began calling the government’s fight against the virus the "people’s war," a phrase used in the official readout of Xi’s telephone call with President Donald Trump on Friday.

There are increasing signs that the propaganda this time is proving less than persuasive.

The Lunar New Year reception in Beijing where Xi spoke became a source of popular anger, a symbol of a government slow to respond to the suffering in Wuhan. Xi and other leaders appear to have been caught off guard by the ferocity of the epidemic.

Senior officials would almost certainly have been informed of the emerging crisis by the time national health authorities told the World Health Organization on Dec. 31, but neither Xi nor other officials in Beijing informed the public.

Xi’s first acknowledgment of the epidemic came Jan. 20, when brief instructions were issued under his name. His first public appearance after the lockdown of Wuhan on Jan. 23 came two days later, when he presided over a meeting of the Communist Party’s top body, the Politburo Standing Committee, which was shown at length on Chinese television. "We’re sure to be able to win in this battle," he proclaimed.

Back then, the death toll was 106. As it rose, Xi allowed other officials to take on more visible roles. Xi’s only appearances have been meeting foreign visitors in the Great Hall of the People or presiding over Communist Party meetings.

On Jan. 28, Xi met with the executive director of the World Health Organization, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, and told Tedros that he "personally directed" the government’s response. Later reports in state media omitted the phrase, saying instead that Xi’s government was "collectively directing" the response.

Since nothing about how Xi is portrayed in state media happens by accident, the tweak suggested a deliberate effort to emphasize shared responsibility.

Xi did not appear on official broadcasts again for a week — until a highly scripted meeting Wednesday with the authoritarian leader of Cambodia, Hun Sen.

There is little evidence that Xi has given up power behind the scenes. Li Keqiang, the premier in formal charge of the leadership group for the crisis, and other officials have said that they take their orders from Xi. The group is filled with officials who work closely under Xi, and its directives emphasize his authority.

"The way the epidemic is being handled now from the top just doesn’t fit with the argument that there’s been a clear shift toward more collective, consultative leadership," said Holly Snape, a British Academy Fellow at the University of Glasgow who studies Chinese politics.

The scale of discontent and the potential challenges for Xi could be measured by repeated references online to the nuclear accident at Chernobyl. Many of them came under the guise of viewer reviews of the popular television miniseries of the same name, which is still available for streaming inside China.

"In any era, any country, it’s the same. Cover everything up," one reviewer wrote.

The Soviet Union of 1986, however, was a different country than China in 2020.

The Soviet state was foundering when Chernobyl happened, said Sergey Radchenko, a professor of international relations at Cardiff University in Wales who has written extensively on Soviet and Chinese politics.

"The Chinese authorities, by contrast, are demonstrating an ability to cope, a willingness to take unprecedented measures — logistical feats that may actually increase the regime’s legitimacy," he added.

Radchenko compared Xi’s actions to those of previous leaders in moments of crisis: Mao Zedong after the Cultural Revolution or Deng Xiaoping after the Tiananmen Square crackdown.

"He’s doing what Mao and Deng would have done in similar circumstances: stepping back into the shadows while remaining firmly in charge."

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.