There is a new, troubling trend among 2020 Democratic Presidential candidates this cycle: advocating and promoting a “litmus test,” or judicial philosophy benchmark, for judicial and Supreme Court candidates if he or she happens to be elected President of the United States.

Such a trend goes against the history of judicial nominations and threatens the principle of judicial independence. Some even call the implementation of a judicial litmus test as breaking the “political taboo.”

This is another installment of an ongoing series of posts summarizing 2020 Democratic presidential candidates' views on judges and the courts.  All posts in this series can be viewed here.

On Brett Kavanaugh:

• When asked if he would have voted to confirm Justice Kavanaugh during a 10/9/2018 interview on MSNBC, Beto O’Rourke stated, “I would not have . . . we need a Supreme Court justice who believes in voting rights. In a state where you can be fired for being gay, [we need] a Supreme Court justice who believes in civil rights.”[1]

On Neil Gorsuch:

• When asked about whether he would have supported the nomination of Justice Gorsuch in a 03/31/17 interview with the Washington Post, O’Rourke said he would not have, explaining “I’m concerned about his [Gorsuch’s] rulings that favor business interest . . . I’m concerned about his lack of support for voting rights, and what seems like his indifference to the impact of undisclosed money on our democracy.”[2]

His Opposition to Trump’s Nominees:

• During the 04/01/2019 “We the People” Summit, O’Rourke stated, “Our next Supreme Court Justices and everyone nominated to a federal bench should believe in a woman’s right to make her own decisions.”[3]