Brian Williams Hopes Gorsuch Becomes Liberal on the Bench

Newsbusters.org ^ | March 21, 2017 | Kyle Drennen

[Kaslin]

After expressing his disappointment earlier in the day that Democrats had been unable to “lay a glove” on Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch during Tuesday’s Senate confirmation hearing, in MSNBC's 3 p.m. ET hour, anchor Brian Williams tried to assuage his fellow liberals by speculating that the conservative judge might shift left while on the high court.

Talking to George Washington University Law School professor Jeffrey Rosen, Williams, known for his active fantasy life, imagined this left-wing dream scenario: “...a question we keep asking, perhaps just to keep things interesting, what is the chance that this nominee could be a surprise to the president who nominated him, along the lines of a [John] Brennan or a [David] Souter?”  

Brian Williams Hopes Gorsuch Becomes Liberal on the Bench

Rosen lamented that Gorsuch would not emulate the liberal justices: “I don't think that he will evolve to a Brennan or a Souter...” However, he did eagerly predict that the nominee may take on the Trump administration: “...but it is possible that Judge Gorsuch could check President Trump in a serious way. Whether it's on the executive order and travel ban or some other form of executive overreach, Judge Gorsuch has made clear that he thinks the job of the judge is to enforce the Constitution regardless of the politics.”

Apparently, Williams really had Souter on the brain, because moments later he asked: “Do you see any reason, Jeffrey, in what we've seen and heard so far from Neil Gorsuch, that this won’t be a – not to diminish it in a any way – but this won't be a net-net, basically no change on the Court from Souter to Gorsuch?” He corrected himself: “I mean, Scalia. Forgive me.”

During an earlier interview with left-wing NPR host Nina Totenberg, Williams similarly evoked Souter and Brennan to advance his hope that Gorsuch would be a “non-ideologue” (translation: liberal):

Nina, going back, looking at the modern era of the Court, let's go as far back as say Souter or Brennan or even Justice White, whose name was already invoked this morning, there have been ideologues. There have been. There have been non-ideologues, people who really have changed before our eyes organically. Famously, Justice Brennan was Eisenhower's greatest regret as president. Where do you put Judge Gorsuch of ideologues, people who have a fixed north star before arriving on the Court?

If Democrats can’t defeat Gorsuch with partisan hit jobs against him throughout the hearing, Williams and his liberal media colleagues are going to demand the future Justice “evolve” to their way of thinking.

Here is a transcript of Williams’s March 21 exchange with Rosen:

3:31 PM ET

(...)

BRIAN WILLIAMS: And Jeffrey, because you have studied the Court and written about it for so many years and in so many different venues, a question we keep asking, perhaps just to keep things interesting, what is the chance that this nominee could be a surprise to the president who nominated him, along the lines of a Brennan or a Souter?

JEFFREY ROSEN [GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL]: I don't think that he will evolve to a Brennan or a Souter, but it is possible that Judge Gorsuch could check President Trump in a serious way. Whether it's on the executive order and travel ban or some other form of executive overreach, Judge Gorsuch has made clear that he thinks the job of the judge is to enforce the Constitution regardless of the politics. And just as the guy he’s being appointed to replace, Justice Robert Jackson voted to check President Harry Truman in the steel seizure case. So I think in these hearings, Judge Gorsuch is making it clear, “I believe in judicial independence and I am willing to check the president who appointed me.”

WILLIAMS: This may get a little text-booky, but what Senator Klobuchar was talking about among her last points before the break was a kind of “selective originalism.” This is the kind of thing that can bedevil a justice or a nominee who is very proud to call themselves an originalist, it's tough to apply in 2017.

ROSEN: Absolutely. And the Democrats are right to note a series of cases where Justice Scalia, the noted originalist, seemed to betray constitutional text and history, most notable, Brown vs. Board of Education, the case that struck down segregation, but is hard to reconcile with original understanding. Judge Gorsuch responded, “I want to translate the original understanding into a world of new technologies.” And he keep citing the global positioning system surveillance case, suggesting that he is not fixed in the 18th century horse and buggy age. But the Democrats are really going to press him on this and say, “Do you agree with the cases where Justice Scalia was, as Senator Klobuchar so powerfully said, ‘a faithless originalist.’”

WILLIAMS: Do you see any reason, Jeffrey, in what we've seen and heard so far from Neil Gorsuch, that this won’t be a – not to diminish it in a any way – but this won't be a net-net, basically no change on the Court from Souter to Gorsuch?

ROSEN: I think could be a change on the Court. There really –

WILLIAMS: I mean, Scalia. Forgive me.

ROSEN: From Scalia to Gorsuch. No, not at all.

(...)

[YogicCowboy]

It began with Biden, Kennedy, and Bork... hence the elevation of bork to a verb.

[Spok]

He’s probably lying.

[Milton Miteybad]

Talking to George Washington University Law School professor Jeffrey Rosen, Williams, known for his active fantasy life, imagined this left-wing dream scenario: “...a question we keep asking, perhaps just to keep things interesting, what is the chance that this nominee could be a surprise to the president who nominated him, along the lines of a [John] Brennan or a [David] Souter?”

The first thing is that Williams got the name of the former Supreme Court Justice wrong. The guy he was talking about, the former Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, was William J. Brennan, Jr., not John Brennan, who until January, 2017, was the Director of the CIA.

Brian Williams also clearly misunderstood the circumstances of William Brennan's nomination. Brennan was a recess appointment by Eisenhower shortly before the 1956 election, who nominated him because his White House advisors thought that doing so might persuade some northeastern Democrats to vote for the GOP ticket if he nominated a Catholic Democrat from the Northeast.

Nobody would have mistaken Brennan for a political conservative before his nomination or after, and it's unlikely that Ike viewed Brennan as anything but the outspoken liberal he had always been throughout his career. Yet Williams seems to think that Eisenhower was in some way "surprised" at how his nominee careened leftward once he was confirmed, when in truth and in fact, Brennan had always been left of center anyway. It's doubtful that Brennan's leftward tilt would have been any surprise to Eisenhower at all.

[oldbill]

Roberts went over to t dark side.

[arthurus]

History shows that there is that possibility and it is not miniscule.

[Trump Girl Kit Cat]

Gorsuch has a HUGE paper trail unlike Roberts, Heritage foundation recommended Gorsuch as #1 on the list, don’t think they could make such a mistake!!! Gorsuch has at least 700 writings on rulings they have been gone over with a fine tooth comb by ALL conservative organizations he seems to pass with flying colors I am not worried about this nominee!! Roberts had a VERY SPARCE paper trail on purpose to get him through VERY UNFORTUNATE for our side!! Looking at it now though Bush was a Lib and the Roberts pic was NOT a mistake as far as Bush is concerned!!!

[arthurus]

I am not doubting Gorsuch. His prospects are better than many. But Warren was nominated as a “conservative” originally and apparently he was, originally. The problem is that “growing’ on the bench has always been only in a leftward direction. Once they don’t have to answer for their actions any more their ideas sometimes change. It’s like a personality that is stable and solid until he wins a lottery. He changes, often radically.

[entropy12]

Liberals come in 2 stripes.

1. The rich people who live in gated communities, in Hollywood, expensive coastal areas etc. They never have to live next to a illegal or street criminal. They do not face financial problems faced by the middle class. They love the cheap household help legal or illegal. They think the middle class taxpayers should subsidize those who prefer to not get a job.

2. The 47% who get free government checks and want them coming by electing more liberals.

[Terry Mross]

Williams may get his wish. You never know.

[Bob Ireland]

***The Judge has done a fantastic job in the hot seat...and believe me, all his deft answers have been driving the lefties crazy!***

Great job! The 'rats ask questions they would never ask a Dem nominee... try to get Gorsuch to commit to how he would rule on hot issues - which would immediately disqualify him for a seat on SCOTUS! ...and then billionaire thief Diane Feinstein says she cannot vote for Gorsuch because he has been so non-commital in his answers. These 'rats are the most despicable people in this country!

They refuse to accept the will of the people, and they say Trump cannot nominate a SCOTUS justice because of an on-going FBI investigation by Dem lacky Comey - which will remain on-going until the end of the Trump Presidency until AG Jeff Sessions takes over the DOJ and rids his dept of all the 'bama hang-ons. When will Sessions step up?

Also, I wish the Prez had nominated Gorsuch for Chief Justice!