

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
As the reasons for blocking Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch continue to mount, there is growing concern that Democrats are simply going to let President Donald Trump's nominee "off the hook," as Sen. Dianne Feinstein did during questioning Tuesday.
In one exchange during the second day of Gorsuch's Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Feinstein, the top Democrat on the committee, asked the appellate judge if he agreed with the dissent or the majority opinion in the District of Columbia v. Heller decision.
After it was clear Gorsuch would not give a clear answer on the case, which upheld an individual's right to possess firearms, Feinstein quickly relented: "Alright, I'll let you off the hook." Watch below:
The brief exchange crystallized fear that Democrats on the panel were going to let the nominee "sail" by, as he did during the first day of testimony despite the growing call for lawmakers to do more to block his confirmation.
Gorsuch's record has shown to be both pro-corporate and anti-woman (a stance further underscored by some of his answers on Tuesday). Not only that, but Monday's hearing coincided with FBI director James Comey's testimony before the House Intelligence Committee, during which he revealed that members of the Trump administration are currently under investigation for possible collusion with the Russian government over the 2016 president election.
That admission in itself, many say, is reason enough to halt the confirmation of Trump's nominee--particularly in light of the fact that Republican lawmakers refused to consider Judge Merrick Garland, former President Barack Obama's nominee to fill the seat vacated by Justice Antonin Scalia.
Speaking on the Senate floor on Tuesday, Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) declared it "the height of irony that Republicans held this Supreme Court seat open for nearly a calendar year while President Obama was in office, but are now rushing to fill the seat for a president whose campaign is under investigation by the FBI."
"You can bet that if the shoe was on the other foot--and a Democratic President was under investigation by the FBI--that Republicans would be howling at the moon about filling a Supreme Court seat in such circumstances," he added.
Meanwhile, progressive advocates are demanding that Democrats do more to stop Gorsuch's confirmation.
Pointing to Comey's "bombshell remarks" on Monday, Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, issued a statement calling for the Judiciary Committee to "immediately pause any consideration of Judge Gorsuch's nomination until the truth can come out."
And economist Robert Reich said that Democrats should focus on the "cloud of illegitimacy hanging over the Trump presidency" to rally party and popular resistance to Gorsuch, writing on Twitter:
While many Democrats and left-leaning organizations argue that the ongoing healthcare battle has sapped attention from the Gorsuch fight, organizers say that lawmakers who concede to the Trump administration will do so at their own peril.
"Senate Democrats have a responsibility to watch what both of Trump's hands are doing," Ben Wikler, with MoveOn.org, said in an interview with The Atlantic. "Even if there's protests about the ACA [Affordable Care Act] next week that are louder than the protests about Gorsuch, they should remember that their votes on Gorsuch will be remembered by grassroots progressives for the rest of their political careers."
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
As the reasons for blocking Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch continue to mount, there is growing concern that Democrats are simply going to let President Donald Trump's nominee "off the hook," as Sen. Dianne Feinstein did during questioning Tuesday.
In one exchange during the second day of Gorsuch's Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Feinstein, the top Democrat on the committee, asked the appellate judge if he agreed with the dissent or the majority opinion in the District of Columbia v. Heller decision.
After it was clear Gorsuch would not give a clear answer on the case, which upheld an individual's right to possess firearms, Feinstein quickly relented: "Alright, I'll let you off the hook." Watch below:
The brief exchange crystallized fear that Democrats on the panel were going to let the nominee "sail" by, as he did during the first day of testimony despite the growing call for lawmakers to do more to block his confirmation.
Gorsuch's record has shown to be both pro-corporate and anti-woman (a stance further underscored by some of his answers on Tuesday). Not only that, but Monday's hearing coincided with FBI director James Comey's testimony before the House Intelligence Committee, during which he revealed that members of the Trump administration are currently under investigation for possible collusion with the Russian government over the 2016 president election.
That admission in itself, many say, is reason enough to halt the confirmation of Trump's nominee--particularly in light of the fact that Republican lawmakers refused to consider Judge Merrick Garland, former President Barack Obama's nominee to fill the seat vacated by Justice Antonin Scalia.
Speaking on the Senate floor on Tuesday, Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) declared it "the height of irony that Republicans held this Supreme Court seat open for nearly a calendar year while President Obama was in office, but are now rushing to fill the seat for a president whose campaign is under investigation by the FBI."
"You can bet that if the shoe was on the other foot--and a Democratic President was under investigation by the FBI--that Republicans would be howling at the moon about filling a Supreme Court seat in such circumstances," he added.
Meanwhile, progressive advocates are demanding that Democrats do more to stop Gorsuch's confirmation.
Pointing to Comey's "bombshell remarks" on Monday, Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, issued a statement calling for the Judiciary Committee to "immediately pause any consideration of Judge Gorsuch's nomination until the truth can come out."
And economist Robert Reich said that Democrats should focus on the "cloud of illegitimacy hanging over the Trump presidency" to rally party and popular resistance to Gorsuch, writing on Twitter:
While many Democrats and left-leaning organizations argue that the ongoing healthcare battle has sapped attention from the Gorsuch fight, organizers say that lawmakers who concede to the Trump administration will do so at their own peril.
"Senate Democrats have a responsibility to watch what both of Trump's hands are doing," Ben Wikler, with MoveOn.org, said in an interview with The Atlantic. "Even if there's protests about the ACA [Affordable Care Act] next week that are louder than the protests about Gorsuch, they should remember that their votes on Gorsuch will be remembered by grassroots progressives for the rest of their political careers."
As the reasons for blocking Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch continue to mount, there is growing concern that Democrats are simply going to let President Donald Trump's nominee "off the hook," as Sen. Dianne Feinstein did during questioning Tuesday.
In one exchange during the second day of Gorsuch's Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Feinstein, the top Democrat on the committee, asked the appellate judge if he agreed with the dissent or the majority opinion in the District of Columbia v. Heller decision.
After it was clear Gorsuch would not give a clear answer on the case, which upheld an individual's right to possess firearms, Feinstein quickly relented: "Alright, I'll let you off the hook." Watch below:
The brief exchange crystallized fear that Democrats on the panel were going to let the nominee "sail" by, as he did during the first day of testimony despite the growing call for lawmakers to do more to block his confirmation.
Gorsuch's record has shown to be both pro-corporate and anti-woman (a stance further underscored by some of his answers on Tuesday). Not only that, but Monday's hearing coincided with FBI director James Comey's testimony before the House Intelligence Committee, during which he revealed that members of the Trump administration are currently under investigation for possible collusion with the Russian government over the 2016 president election.
That admission in itself, many say, is reason enough to halt the confirmation of Trump's nominee--particularly in light of the fact that Republican lawmakers refused to consider Judge Merrick Garland, former President Barack Obama's nominee to fill the seat vacated by Justice Antonin Scalia.
Speaking on the Senate floor on Tuesday, Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) declared it "the height of irony that Republicans held this Supreme Court seat open for nearly a calendar year while President Obama was in office, but are now rushing to fill the seat for a president whose campaign is under investigation by the FBI."
"You can bet that if the shoe was on the other foot--and a Democratic President was under investigation by the FBI--that Republicans would be howling at the moon about filling a Supreme Court seat in such circumstances," he added.
Meanwhile, progressive advocates are demanding that Democrats do more to stop Gorsuch's confirmation.
Pointing to Comey's "bombshell remarks" on Monday, Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, issued a statement calling for the Judiciary Committee to "immediately pause any consideration of Judge Gorsuch's nomination until the truth can come out."
And economist Robert Reich said that Democrats should focus on the "cloud of illegitimacy hanging over the Trump presidency" to rally party and popular resistance to Gorsuch, writing on Twitter:
While many Democrats and left-leaning organizations argue that the ongoing healthcare battle has sapped attention from the Gorsuch fight, organizers say that lawmakers who concede to the Trump administration will do so at their own peril.
"Senate Democrats have a responsibility to watch what both of Trump's hands are doing," Ben Wikler, with MoveOn.org, said in an interview with The Atlantic. "Even if there's protests about the ACA [Affordable Care Act] next week that are louder than the protests about Gorsuch, they should remember that their votes on Gorsuch will be remembered by grassroots progressives for the rest of their political careers."