tonight. i studied every aspect of his life. he could have had any job at any law firm for any amount of money but what wanted to do was be a judge and uphold our laws and constitution. qualifications of judge gorsuch are beyond zpuchlt he s the man of our country and a man who our country really needs and needs badly to ensure the rule of law and the rule of justice. i would like to thank senate leadership, i only hope that both democrats and republicans can come together for once for the good of the country. and also been a lot of comparisons between judge gorsuch and late justice antonin scalia, the seat that he might fill in terms of judicial philosophy.
judicial philosophy is fidelity to the text. he doesn t believe judges should base their decisions solely on the law he believes sorry. i don t want to screw that one up. that his decision should be based slowly on the law and the constitution, not on their own policy preferences or personal feelings. he ll be a reliable on the bench regardless of background. i would note, i think and i always want to caveat this, but to my understanding, he would be the first justice that will serve with the as someone he clerked for on the bench. so it will be sort of a first when he is con firpfirmed by th senate. today is february 1st. we re kicking off black history month. the president has events planned throughout the month starting today with a significance th administration african-american appointees.
social issues. you know, it s said that he really does fit in the scalia mode. he s an audit textural. in other words, he believes that words matter. he believes that the meaning the words matter and therefore have purpose. i will say this, and i found this interesting for those who sort of considered his nomination, back in his confirmation hearing for the circuit in 200 of, this would be in the summer of 200 of, sandra graham asked him how do you fit in with judicial philosophy. judge gorsuch came out and said, look, i really don t want to be pigeonholed. i think that s a mistake that people make by pigeonholing themselves in one place or another. and when they do that, they miss the gray areas of the law. and gave a little warning that people can change than what we originally thought they may be. so, i think it s clear he s going to be a conservative vote. i think you can look at his writings in the areas of
that you agree with, age, you may also consider the diversity of the court, or some other factors like that. but always on your mind has to be can they be confirmed? and you can guess at that but it is kind of a mystery, right? you can never know if they can be confirmed unless and until you try to confirm them. as this president looks at the skofrt, he looks at the justices and their ages, you know justice age 80, justice age 77, 76, 74, the president has to be looking at the court and thinking, man, if only i could grab someone who was qualified who could do the job, whose judicial philosophy i agree with, who is young. if only i could take somebody like that and test-fire them in the senate. if only there was some way to know if advance that if i pick this kid for the supreme court the senate could confirm. only if there was a way to test that. there is a way to test that. say hello to this guy. that is a name that will get
if you re president, what are you looking for in a supreme court justice? as president you get to pick people for the court. obviously you want them to be qualified, to be a good judge. you want them to share some of your basic values, and how you think a judge should approach the law. you want them to be fairly young. i mean, as president, after all, you only get to serve for a term, or two, if you re lucky. but your supreme court picks are there for life. so when you pick somebody you want to make sure they have plenty of life left. you also want to make sure they can be confirmed. presidents choose supreme court nominees but it s the senate who confirms them. though it is rare for the senate to outright reject a pick for the supreme court, it happened. it happened to robert bork in 1987, and the threat that it was going to happen to harriet miers in 2005 made president george w. bush withdraw her name from consideration. so you re looking at a qualified for the job, judicial philoso