While Senator Ted Cruz acted like Judge Neil Gorsuch was the Beatles and the Senate’s Supreme Court confirmation hearing was the Ed Sullivan Show, Senator Al Franken (D-MN) decided to actually ask Gorsuch about his decision making. Sen. Franken specifically went through the merits of Judge Gorsuch’s dissenting opinion in what has been called the “Frozen Truck Driver case.” The case consisted of Gorsuch siding with big business in the firing of a trucker. The trucker was stuck in an unheated truck. His supervisor gave him two terrible options—both potentially deadly:
Campaign Action
[...] haul a trailer with frozen brakes—or sit in an unheated truck in subzero weather, potentially freezing to death. The driver had taken option three—unhitching the trailer and driving the trailerless truck to safety and warmth—an option Gorsuch said did not exist under the law.
Sen. Franken, after recounting this case, pulled no punches:
Franken: But the plain meaning rule has an exception. When using the plain meaning rule would create an absurd result, courts should depart from the plain meaning. It is absurd to say this company is in its rights to fire him because he made the choice of possibly dying from freezing to death or causing other people to die possibly by driving an unsafe vehicle. That's absurd. Now, I had a career in identifying absurdity. [ Laughter ] And I know it when I see it. And it makes me -- you know, it makes me question your judgment.
This is at the heart of the matter. You can argue that Gorsuch is a big business shill (he basically is) but more important than that is that his decision making shows a lack of sense. The job he is up for is that of the Supreme Court of the United States of America. The decisions he decides for however many years he would possibly serve for will affect hundreds of millions of people. His inability to make a reasonable decision in a case where a man was going to freeze to death is … absurd.
