Supreme Court Nominee Concerned With Unchecked Power of Federal Agencies

Following President’s Trump’s nomination of 10th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Neil Gorsuch, leftist groups continue to grasp at straws hoping for a legitimate reason to block Judge Gorsuch. A close examination of his resume and record reveal a judge who will interpret the text of Constitution as written–not making up rights to suit his political preferences. Judge Gorsuch’s conservative judicial philosophy is a win for the American people. If confirmed, the Supreme Court may be well positioned to curtail the power of federal agencies from violating individual rights.

Judge Gorsuch’s opinions throughout his career highlight the danger of Congress abdicating the court’s and its own authority by passing off legal interpretation of ambiguous federal rules to federal agencies.  A 1984 Supreme Court case established this practice, commonly called Chevron deference, requiring judges to defer to a federal agency’s interpretation of their own ambiguous statutes. But does it make sense for the fox to guard the hen house?

Judge Gorsuch notes that adhering to Chevron deference strips the court of its “obligation to say what the law is,” and fundamentally undermines the separation of powers as agencies usurp power from Congress and take on the role of interpretation designated to the courts.

As the Trump administration carries out its promise to “drain the swamp” and roll back red tape flowing from federal agencies, Judge Gorsuch’s constitutional philosophy will hopefully prevail on the court as well.

It’s time bureaucracy answer for the unchecked power amassed over the years. President Trump hit a homerun with this pick and fulfilled a major campaign promise–something rare in Washington, D.C. these days. Now, the Senate must fulfill their proper role of “advice and consent” and swiftly confirm Judge Gorsuch to follow in Scalia’s footsteps in the nation’s highest court.

Sign Up
Sign Up