Gorsuch refuses to comment on legality of religious litmus test for entry to U.S.
WASHINGTON — Asked whether it would be legal to apply a religious litmus test to people entering the United States, Judge Neil Gorsuch said Tuesday that he was unable to comment since courts are currently litigating that issue.
“That’s an issue that’s currently being litigated actively, as you know,” Gorsuch responded to Sen. Pat Leahy, D-Vt., declining to answer while taking questions during the Supreme Court nominee’s second day of Senate hearings.
WATCH LIVE/GET LIVE UPDATES: Neil Gorsuch’s Senate confirmation hearing
Gorsuch was referring to President Trump’s travel ban, which critics say is a scaled-back version of his campaign promise to temporarily bar all Muslims from entering the U.S. The revised executive order, which has been blocked by a federal judge, blocks visitors from six majority-Muslim countries. Trump has vowed to continue fighting for his travel ban.
Leahy then asked Gorsuch whether a “blanket religious test” — for example, that no Jewish people could enter the country — would be constitutional.
“Senator, we have a free exercise clause that protects the free exercise of religious liberties by all persons in the country,” Gorsuch said. He also said it would be illegal for the military to apply a religious test to recruits.
Leahy said he wanted to know more about Gorsuch’s views on Trump’s travel ban since, as the Vermont senator characterized it, a member of Congress said that confirming Gorsuch would be the best way for the president to uphold his campaign promise to bar Muslims from the U.S. Leahy’s office told Yahoo News he was referring to Rep. Mo Brooks, R-Ala., who said Trump should get Gorsuch on the Supreme Court before it rules on the travel ban.
“Senator, a lot of people say a lot of silly things,” Gorsuch replied. “He has no idea how I’d rule in that case. And senator, I’m not going to say anything here that would give anybody any idea how I’d rule on any case like that that would come before the Supreme Court.”
He added it would be “grossly improper” for a judge to preview how he or she would rule on any future case.
Read more from Yahoo News:
