Americans deserve and need a fully functioning Supreme Court, and so we get it that Republicans are considering the so-called nuclear option to confirm the eminently qualified Neil Gorsuch to the post. However, we strongly disagree with the strategy to deploy the rule change, as the filibuster it would end serves as a critically important safeguard that would be dangerous to lose.

The rule change, which would forever eliminate the filibuster from interfering with the Supreme Court confirmation process, would only exacerbate the hyperpartisan culture in Washington. Moreover, such a change would likely usher in a future in which the Senate loses its more deliberative contribution to American legislation.

So we are more than distressed with Colorado Sen. Cory Gardner’s decision to support trashing the filibuster in Supreme Court confirmation proceedings. We urge the senator to rethink his position and work instead to stop this erosion of checks and balances.

Gardner won our support in 2014 because Congress was dysfunctional and needed a fresh leader. Here is his chance to prove he’s not a lockstep GOP minion, but a free thinker.

Yes, it would be a great shame if the Democrats block Gorsuch, a Colorado native. As we have said more than once, he is a top-shelf candidate who would be a welcome addition to the highest court in the land.

And yes, we don’t blame Democrats for their anger. Senate Republicans earned the opposition party’s wrath in deciding not to even debate President Barack Obama’s nominee, the also eminently qualified Merrick Garland, following the untimely death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia a year ago. Fighting fire with fire is an understandable result of the Grand Old Party’s obstruction.

Another caveat: Democrats are hardly blameless when it comes to the erosion of statesmanship. It was Democrats who, in 2013, chose to strip the filibuster from confirmation of executive-branch nominees and lesser judicial nominees.

This tit-for-tat escalation that has been mounting since the day Obama took office should end with the Gorsuch vote, and the party that blinks first will be the winner in the eyes of history.

The modern filibuster requires a vote of 60 senators to break. To bring a vote on Gorsuch to the floor, Republicans would have to get at least eight Democrats to vote with them to allow the confirmation vote to proceed. Once that threshold is crossed, a simple majority, or 51 votes, is all Gorsuch would require.

Gardner argues that in our nation’s history, we’ve never seen a successful filibuster of a Supreme Court nominee. He further notes that some justices have been confirmed with just over 50 votes. Fair enough, but presidents have known in making their nominations that the hurdle exists, and have tailored their picks accordingly. Without the threat, President Donald Trump’s choice might have been far more partisan.

To his credit, Colorado’s junior senator tells us he remains supportive of preserving the filibuster when it comes to legislative debates. That’s good to know, but it is difficult to believe that the temptation to strip the filibuster would end in the aftermath of a nuclear Gorsuch confirmation.

We’re in a weird place on this vote. We’ve called for our senior senator, Michael Bennet, a Democrat, to press his party for an up-or-down vote. Now we’re asking Gardner to avoid the nuclear option to get to that straightforward solution.

Better to have the seat unfilled until senators can grow up and do right by the American people.

Trashing the filibuster over a single nominee would be doing a judge of Gorsuch’s caliber — and the nation — a terrible disservice.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by e-mail or mail.