Neil Gorsuch’s Path to the Supreme Court Was a Hot Mess, but It’s Not the End — It’s Just the Beginning

Well, that happened.

As much as we’d hoped that sanity would prevail, a majority of Senators have decided to blow up longstanding rules designed to promote bipartisan consensus (or, at a minimum, to temper Presidential extremism) to force Neil Gorsuch onto the Supreme Court and — more importantly — to give you-know-who a political “win.”

Pretty gross, right?

But as someone who has been doing this work for almost 20 years, let me tell you what I think we’ve gained, rather than focusing on the vote that we just lost.

Unlike with any previous nominee, Neil Gorsuch’s anti-LGBT record was a key part of the story of why he was too out of sync with the American people to belong on the Supreme Court. In the past, we would have had sidebar conversations with our supporters in the Senate, but never really expected that a nominee’s antigay philosophy would be held against him in any meaningful way.

That changed this time around. Gorsuch’s unwillingness to commit to the key constitutional principles that have brought LGBT people out of the shadows — liberty, equality and privacy — were part of a larger narrative that he was simply too far out of the mainstream to deserve a lifetime appointment.

After Lambda Legal submitted a letter opposing Judge Gorsuch’s nomination, the Senate Judiciary Committee invited a representative of the LGBT community to testify at the confirmation hearing. To see our concerns placed on equal footing with those of other communities who have historically been part of the conversation demonstrates just how much progress we have made in a relatively short period of time.

Let’s also talk about the folks who stepped up for our community in a big way.

Senator Chris Coons dedicated a huge (YUGE!) portion of his time to questioning Judge Gorsuch about his understanding of key constitutional principles at the heart of the key LGBT rights cases of the last two we decades, such as Lawrence v. Texas, Windsor v. United States and Obergefell v. Hodges. He referred to Lambda Legal’s letter, and introduced it into the record for posterity.

Numerous other Senators — including Patrick Leahy, Al Franken, Amy Klobuchar, Mazie Hirono, Dick Durbin and Dianne Feinstein — also pressed Judge Gorsuch on how his judicial philosophy would affect our community (although with little success due to Gorsuch’s unprecedented stonewalling).

So, even as we lick our wounds from this battle, we should take a moment to salute all of these Senators who were more than just allies at this critical moment in our nation’s history. They used their powerful voice to speak out on behalf of our families, and so, as they return home for the April recess, I would encourage you to call or stop by their office to thank them.

If your Senator did not stand up for you, well, you know what to do.

Finally, this exercise — however difficult — reminds all of us how important it is to remain engaged.

The arc of the moral universe may bend towards justice, but it does not bend itself.

When Judge Gorsuch was nominated in January, many people predicted that he would easily secure the 60 votes necessary for confirmation. We dispelled the #AlternativeFacts being peddled about Judge Gorsuch by working with progressive allies to expose his antigay, anti-trans, anti-woman, anti-choice and anti-worker agenda.

While it is disappointing to have lost this particular fight, there is no longer any real debate over what kind of nominee President Trump put forth. And there is no longer any doubt that, to certain folks in Washington, securing a “political win” was more important than safeguarding the rights of millions of Americans.

So it’s okay to be angry, sad, frustrated and disappointed. I am too. But know this:

Lambda Legal was there. The voice of our community was heard. We made a difference.

And we won’t stop. #WeObject