A Jurisprudence of Doubt: Judge Gorsuch’s Troubling Inconsistency About Disclosing His Constitutional Views

Summary

After months of touting his litmus tests for a Supreme Court Justice, numerous comments disparaging federal judges who do not rule in his favor, as well as authoritarian and anti-Constitution executive actions, Trump placed a profound burden on his nominee to the Supreme Court, Judge Neil Gorsuch.

During his confirmation hearing, Gorsuch had to prove to the American people that, if confirmed, he would serve as an independent check on the elected branches, especially when they violate constitutional and legislative protections, including protections against corruption; that would not be a rubber stamp for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and business interests; and that he is open-minded, fair, and guided by the whole text and history of the Constitution, and not by a right-wing political agenda.

Unfortunately, Gorsuch failed to satisfy this burden by being elusive on basic questions of constitutional rights and guarantees. He refused to shine any light on his judicial philosophy concerning voting rights, the right to choose an abortion, access to contraception, and equality for gay, lesbian and transgender people. Although he provided his views on other cases and constitutional values, Gorsuch had virtually nothing to say about these fundamental principles.

More from Federal Courts and Nominations

Federal Courts and Nominations
January 16, 2020

EVENT: Are We All Textualists and Originalists Now?

Host: American Constitution Society - Georgetown University Law Center
A discussion with progressive constitutional experts on how prominent textualism and originalism have become in...
Participants: Elizabeth B. Wydra, Victoria Nourse, John Mikhail, Farah Peterson
Federal Courts and Nominations
January 2, 2020

SCOTUS goes into the new year with a loaded plate as impeachment trial looms

ABA Journal
The U.S. Supreme Court has multiple high-profile cases on its docket this term, including cases...
Federal Courts and Nominations
December 18, 2019

PODCAST (Sphere): Should the U.S. Supreme Court Overturn More Laws?

Sphere
In general, are most laws and regulations constitutional? Should the courts do more to enforce...
Federal Courts and Nominations
December 9, 2019

How Will the Justices Rule?

The New York Times Upfront
The Supreme Court is considering important cases this term on a variety of hot-button issues
Federal Courts and Nominations
November 13, 2019

#PurpleChairChat: SCOTUS Cases Livestream Discussion

On November 13, 2019, Constitutional Accountability Center’s President Elizabeth Wydra and Appellate Counsel Dayna Zolle...
By: Elizabeth B. Wydra, Dayna Zolle
Federal Courts and Nominations
October 1, 2019

#PurpleChairChat: SCOTUS Term Preview Livestream Discussion

On October 1, 2019, Constitutional Accountability Center’s President Elizabeth Wydra and Chief Counsel Brianne Gorod...
By: Elizabeth B. Wydra, Brianne J. Gorod