There is a growing and resounding base of support for Judge Neil Gorsuch's swift and prompt confirmation ahead of his Senate confirmation hearing next week. Yesterday, The Washington Postpublished an opinion article by Jonathan H. Adler entitled "Judge Gorsuch attracts broad bipartisan support among legal elites." Adler presents a list of many legal heavy-hitters supporting Gorsuch and his confirmation. Below are some of the more notable examples and excerpts from Adler's piece demonstrating the breadth of Gorsuch's support.  

Once again the Democrats and their allies are screaming scandal where there is none.  Claiming that the 46 US Attorneys asked to resign last week is somehow wrong or unusual.  As Hans Von Spakovsky states:

Today, America's Foundation for Life and Liberty (AFLL), of which RNLA Vice President for Election Education David Warrington is Chairman and Lead Counsel, filed a FOIA request with the FEC for records related to the altFEC Twitter account:

According to the left, vote fraud is a myth.  The left may want to rethink that line of attack.  Since February 5 when President Trump announced that “Vice President Mike Pence will oversee a special commission to investigate voter fraud,” there have been at least 21 incidents of vote fraud reported in 17 states.  And to be fully forthcoming, we are sure we are missing things. 

One of the most popular targets of attack in the Trump administration for the media, Democrats, and other liberals is White House Counsel Don McGahn.  As RNLA Vice President for Election Education David Warrington wrote last week:

Former FEC Commissioner Ann Ravel left the FEC last week in a storm of her usual rhetoric about the FEC's dysfunction and the woes of entities spending money to engage in political speech.  But as RNLA member Paul Jossey points out, she never understood the role of the FEC:

In their continuing effort to defend Hillary Clinton and attack the Trump administration, liberals are now equating then-Governor Pence's legal use of a private email address to then-Secretary Clinton's illegal use of a private server to house classified information.  For a thorough explanation of why the two are not remotely equivalent, legally or morally,read this article by David French.  

This afternoon, David Warrington, RNLA's Vice President for Election Education, penned an op-ed for the Daily Caller, entitled: "The Witch Hunt Against Sessions Will Just Make Democrats Look Ridiculous." The article calls out and refutes any claims of "perjury" made by the left regarding Attorney General Jeff Sessions' testimony.

Is there a different standard under the ethical rules governing lawyers for Republicans and Democrats?  According to some recent actions by liberal attorneys, they think there is.

To further prove the point that elections have consequences and we are in a new world of election law and litigation, compare two news stories from this week.  First, the Trump administration has dropped the Department of Justice's opposition to Texas' voter ID law on the basis that it is intentionally racially discriminatory, to give the state time to amend the law.  Second, North Carolina's new Democrat governor and attorney general are attempting to withdraw (potentially unethically) the pending petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court regarding the Fourth Circuit's decision last summer striking down North Carolina's voter ID law.