The Senate Judiciary Committee continued confirmation hearings on the nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court on Tuesday. Gorsuch faced numerous questions [USA Today report] and concerns by Democrats on issues of abortion, gun control and campaign spending. Gorsuch refused to answer many of these questions stating that his personal views were irrelevant and that he would keep an open mind and rule fairly based upon the facts and law of each case. However, Gorsuch did state [Politico report] that Roe v. Wade is precedent and the Obergefell decision supporting same-sex marriage is “absolutely settled law.” Further, Gorsuch pledged to keep “an open mind” and offered that he has “offered no promises on how I’d rule in any case to anyone, and I don’t think it’s appropriate for a judge to do so.” Upon discussing Roe v. Wade, Gorsuch stated that he would have walked out had President Donald Trump asked him on his stance for overruling the decision. Proponents of Gorsuch’s nomination argue [Fox News report] that such a tactic is common and expected going back to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg who made it a principle of her nominating process to not telegraph where should would stand on any issue or case. Gorsuch continually stressed that he should not weigh in on political matter as”it would be very imprudent for judges to start commenting on political disputes.” Gorsuch’s hearings started [JURIST report] on Monday, and a vote by the panel is not expected until April 3.

Supreme Court appointments have been a highly politicized issue [JURIST op-ed] over the past year, since the passing of Justice Antonin Scalia. Trump nominated Gorsuch [JURIST report] in January to fill the late Justice Scalia’s Supreme Court seat. Some have argued that Gorsuch’s nomination should be contested and blocked after the nomination of Judge Merrick Garland by former president Barack Obama expired in January without a vote [JURIST reports]. Others argue that judicial appointments deserve to be treated in a non-partisan manner [JURIST op-ed]. A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit [JURIST report] in November attempted to force a vote on former nominee Garland.