President Donald Trump announced Monday that he would announce his nominee to the Supreme Court of the United States Tuesday at 8 pm ET from the White House.
There had been three possible choices to succeed the late Justice Antonin Scalia: William Pryor, Neil Gorsuch and Thomas Hardiman. The Associated Press gives the details:
Pryor, 54, is an Alabama-based judge on the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Gorsuch, 49, is on the Denver-based 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and Hardiman, 51, sits on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Pittsburgh. All three were nominated by President George W. Bush for their current posts.
Pryor’s chances had been waning in the last 24 hours, leaving Gorsuch and Hardiman, who are both in Washington, DC Tuesday. Now Independent Journal Review is reporting that Gorsuch is Trump’s pick.
Speaking on background, an administration source instrumental to the SCOTUS selection process tells IJR, “Yes. It is Gorsuch. 100 percent. The Hardiman thing is a head fake.”
Thomas Hardiman is the other Judge Trump was considering for the vacancy, who is also in Washington, D.C.
A second source within the Trump administration confirmed IJR’s reporting.
The source claims that Judge Gorsuch will join the president Tuesday night at the White House at 8 PM for the announcement.
Gorsuch graduated from Columbia, Harvard and Oxford and clerked for Supreme Court Justices Byron White and Anthony Kennedy. He also briefly worked at the Justice Department. Gorsuch is said to be an avid outdoorsman.
He has served on the 10th Circuit since 2006, being confirmed by a voice vote. At 49, he would be the youngest Supreme Court justice in 25 years.
“The real appeal of Gorsuch nomination is he’s likely to be the most effective conservative nominee in terms of winning over Anthony Kennedy and forging conservative decisions on the court,” Jeffrey Rosen of the National Constitution Center told Politico.
“He’s unusual for his memorable writing style, the depth of his reading and his willingness to rethink constitutional principles from the ground up. Like Justice Scalia, he sometimes reaches results that favor liberals when he thinks the history or text of the Constitution or the law require it, especially in areas like criminal law or the rights of religious minorities, but unlike Scalia he’s less willing to defer to regulations and might be more willing to second-guess Trump’s regulatory decision.”
Source: Independent Journal Review
Source: Town Hall