This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2017, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

Neil Gorsuch stated that no one had asked him for any commitments yet he has repeatedly sided with big business over the interests of workers and consumers. In contrast, Merrick Garland was a candidate whose moderate decisions would have balanced the court.

The unconstitutional partisan conspiracy that blocked Garland must not be legitimized with the appointment of Gorsuch. The "best judgment" of candidate Gorsuch is actually less moderate than that of Judge Antonin Scalia, whom Donald Trump aimed to replace with this candidate.

Approval of Gorsuch would remove a major check on Steve Bannon-style extremism. We would have a court less resistant to the elimination of environmental regulation, financial safeguards, worker protection, protection of women, reproductive rights, LGBT rights, religious liberty and limits on money in politics.

Republican rhetoric that attempts to distance this nomination from its partisan roots is yet another assault on democracy.

Elise Love

Midvale