Here's how it looks in an article.
Supreme Court Nominee Calls Trump’s Attacks on Judiciary ‘Demoralizing’
WASHINGTON — Judge Neil M. Gorsuch, President Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court, privately expressed dismay on Wednesday over Mr. Trump’s increasingly aggressive attacks on the judiciary, calling the president’s criticism of independent judges “demoralizing” and “disheartening.”
The remarks by Judge Gorsuch, chosen by Mr. Trump last week to serve on the nation’s highest court, came as the president lashed out at the federal appellate judges who are considering a challenge to his executive order banning travel from seven predominantly Muslim countries. The president called their judicial proceedings “disgraceful” and described the courts as “so political.”
Those remarks followed Mr. Trump’s weekend Twitter outburst in which he derided a Seattle district court judge who blocked his travel ban as a “so-called judge” whose “ridiculous” ruling would be overturned.
Judge Gorsuch expressed his disappointment with Mr. Trump’s comments about the judiciary in a private conversation with Senator Richard Blumenthal, Democrat of Connecticut, as he paid courtesy calls on Capitol Hill to build support for his confirmation. An account of the discussion was confirmed by a White House adviser working to advance the Gorsuch confirmation, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to comment.
The spectacle of a Supreme Court nominee breaking so starkly with the president who named him underscored the unusual nature of Mr. Trump’s public feud with the judiciary. Speaking to a group of sheriffs and police chiefs on Wednesday, the president said the appellate judges had failed to grasp concepts even “a bad high school student would understand.”
“This is highly unusual,” said Michael W. McConnell, a former federal judge who directs the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford University. “Mr. Trump is shredding longstanding norms of etiquette and interbranch comity.”
Presidents have traditionally tried to refrain from even appearing to intervene in court cases that concern them or their policies, or from impugning the motives and qualifications of jurists charged with deciding them, according to judges and legal experts from across the political spectrum. The tradition is important to preserving the separation of powers that is a pillar of American democracy, establishing an independent judiciary to serve as a check on the executive branch, they argued.