(CNSNews.com) – House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), the star of a CNN town hall on Tuesday night, signaled her opposition to President Trump’s nomination of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, calling the nomination “a very hostile appointment.”
“Elections have ramifications,” Pelosi told CNN’s Jake Tapper.
“And here is a living, breathing example of it -- the president and his first appointment to the court, and hopefully his only appointment to the court, has appointed someone who has come down on the side of corporate America versus class action suits, on securities fraud, he's come down against employees' rights, clean air, clean water, food safety, safety in medicine and the rest.
“If you care about that for your children, he's not your guy.”
Pelosi quoted former Rep. Gabby Gifford – now a gun control activist – as saying that Gorsuch “comes down on the side of felons over gun safety.”
Pelosi also described Gorsuch as “hostile to women's reproductive rights,” pointing to the Hobby Lobby case, in which Gorsuch wrote  that the government's contraception mandate infringes religious liberties.
“The list goes on and on,” Pelosi said. “[He] Criticized progressives for bringing cases that relate to LGBT progress, taking those cases to the court.
“What saddens me the most as a mom and a grandmother, though, is his hostility towards children in school, children with autism. He has ruled that they don't have the same rights under the IDEA (the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) that children -- that they could reach their intellectual and social advancement under the law. He has said that doesn't apply to them. He's come down against them under the ADA, as well, and again under IDEA.
“So it's a very hostile appointment --- hail fellow, well met -- lovely family, I'm sure. But as far as your family is concerned, and all the -- if you breathe air, drink water, eat food, take medicine, or in any other way interact with the courts, this is a very bad decision.
“Well outside the mainstream of American legal thought. Not committed to Supreme Court precedents, Supreme Court precedents.”