‘Nuclear option’ on Supreme Court confirmation raises questions about Constitution
We have a new Supreme Court judge in Neil Gorsuch. The previous 60-count approval in the Senate seemed quite sensible, as it meant that a judge would need support from both sides of the aisle and would not be extremely right or left. The real problem as I see it is that the U.S. Senate could change the long-established law so easily, with a simple majority vote, doing away with 200 years of history. I had no idea that this could be done so quickly, and would have presumed that such a change would take a long time to debate and have required at least a 60-count vote to be approved.
This so-called “nuclear option” is a truly terrible idea because it shows that our Constitution — and its relationship to our Congress — is not the solid document I have hoped it to be.
Clement Salvadori, Atascadero
This story was originally published April 16, 2017 at 12:31 PM with the headline "‘Nuclear option’ on Supreme Court confirmation raises questions about Constitution."