Gorsuch Defends Work In Bush DOJ On Amendment Slashing Detainee Rights

Supreme Court Justice nominee Neil Gorsuch pauses while testifying on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, March 21, 2017, at his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

Judge Neil Gorsuch on Tuesday said that he was “proud of” his work coordinating the legislative effort to pass an amendment pushed by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) that would have slashed the legal rights of detainees at the U.S. detention center in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

“I’m proud of it because we managed to come up with a bipartisan bill that I think passed this body with over 80 or maybe 90 votes, I don’t remember,” Gorsuch told Senate Judiciary Committee ranking member Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) during his confirmation hearing to the Supreme Court.

As a senior official in the Justice Department during President George. W. Bush’s administration, Gorsuch worked with Graham in 2005 to draft the amendment to the Detainee Treatment Act cutting Guantánamo detainees off from access to federal courts.

He said on Tuesday that the bill “affirmed this country’s commitment to prevent cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and … provided a regime that was agreed by the Congress and the president on how Guantánamo detainees should have their claims processed.”

Pressed by Feinstein on the part of the amendment that would have barred detainees from petitioning for a writ of habeas corpus to challenge their imprisonment, Gorsuch said that he was just “a lawyer for a client” and the bill “was eventually litigated as all these things are.”

“The D.C. Circuit upheld it. The Supreme Court of the United States eventually many, many years later found that the process was insufficient,” he said. “I respect that decision as a precedent of the United States Supreme Court no less than any other.”

“Count me with John Bellinger most of the time on these things,” he added, referring to the State Department’s top lawyer who played a key role in the authorization for torture.

Under further questioning, Gorsuch also said that he does not believe that the authority to intercept the communications of U.S. citizens is “inherent in the office” of the President.

“Do you still believe that the President has inherent authority — this is important — to intercept the communications of Americans in the United States that cannot be legislated away by Congress?” Feinstein asked.

“Goodness, no,” Gorsuch replied.

Latest Livewire

Notable Replies

  1. Well…if you’re gonna be a right wing ideologue OWN it. Thanks for playing!

  2. Mr Gorsuch… do you believe that the Supreme Court has ever made a mistake in any of their rulings ?

  3. Avatar for vjy vjy says:

    Bellinger’s involvement in the fomentation of torture policy remains unclear. He privately protests no involvement, but the emerging facts cast serious doubt on his narrative. For instance, it is now established that Bellinger was directly involved in the decision to subject three detainees to waterboarding, a fact which very clearly has colored his judgment about torture.

    Since Bellinger became legal adviser, the State Department has adopted a series of increasingly bizarre positions on torture. Bellinger has aggressively denied the undeniable—as witnessed in an offensive Bellinger undertook with Rice to deny the existence of blacksites in Europe and to recast the extraordinary renditions program. His major contentions in this regard have since been established as false, and his credibility is now negligible. But Bellinger also presented novel interpretations of the Convention Against Torture in Geneva—arguing that it was inapplicable in a wartime setting and raising a host of other highly implausible objections.

  4. And Gorsuch responds: Only the ones that were made by liberal activist justices.

  5. Avatar for paulw paulw says:

    It’s doesn’t really matter how many years administration lawyers were able to delay supreme court review. If the court says something was unlawful, it was unlawful the day it was done.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for paulw Avatar for sysprog Avatar for lcelsie Avatar for vjy Avatar for loss_mentality

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: