Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DonViejo

(60,536 posts)
Wed Mar 22, 2017, 02:01 PM Mar 2017

Gorsuch: 'I'm sorry' for ruling against autistic student

Source: Politico


By BENJAMIN WERMUND 03/22/17 01:15 PM EDT


Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch said an opinion he wrote siding with a Colorado school district over the family of an autistic student was "wrong" and "I'm sorry" for it — but he had been bound by precedent.

The 10th Circuit judge made the comments after Sen. Dick Durbin announced during Gorsuch's confirmation hearing that the Supreme Court had just ruled unanimously in a similar case that school districts must go the extra mile to accommodate students with disabilities.

"It’s a powerful decision, it’s a unanimous decision, it was written by the chief justice of the court,” Durbin said. "Why in your early decision did you want to lower the bar so low ... ?" Gorsuch responded that he is often asked whether he abides precedent and whether he always like the rulings he reaches.

"Here’s a case for you," he said. "If anyone is suggesting that I like a result where an autistic child happens to lose, that’s a heartbreaking accusation to me. Heartbreaking. But the fact of the matter is I was bound by circuit precedent," Gorsuch continued. "I was wrong because I was bound by circuit precedent and I’m sorry."


Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/neil-gorsuch-im-sorry-autistic-student-236364

25 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Gorsuch: 'I'm sorry' for ruling against autistic student (Original Post) DonViejo Mar 2017 OP
Gorsuch is a prick world wide wally Mar 2017 #1
This tells me that all of his interpretation of the law will be extremely narrow LisaM Mar 2017 #2
Right. elleng Mar 2017 #18
Actually, Scalia ignored precedent and was a Hortensis Mar 2017 #25
Anyone able to locate Neil Gorsuch's soul BeyondGeography Mar 2017 #3
It is in an undisclosed location - with Cheney's. Marie Marie Mar 2017 #16
He wasn't bound by precedent exboyfil Mar 2017 #4
Yeah, right. And would he feel "bound by precedent" to honor Roe vs Wade? Nitram Mar 2017 #5
If he had been on the Supreme Court when Brown v Board of Education was decided Fortinbras Armstrong Mar 2017 #14
The one consistent feature of all of Gorsuch's rulings. hamsterjill Mar 2017 #6
bound by circuit precedent my tuccus benld74 Mar 2017 #7
Gorsuch is a lying sack of shit. He has no heart. He will be to the right of Scalia. nt SunSeeker Mar 2017 #8
That's ridiculous Buckeyeblue Mar 2017 #9
no he isn't and don't believe his manufactured bullshit that he is. nt Javaman Mar 2017 #10
So Gorsuch hides behind precedent unless he's ruling on something to further "religious freedom" or Lanius Mar 2017 #11
And this zealot said yes to a sexual predator that did this: turbinetree Mar 2017 #12
I'm not a lawyer. Do judges always have to follow precedent? Vinca Mar 2017 #13
If they always followed precedent we wouldn't need them to do their job. harun Mar 2017 #15
Lower courts must follow precedent More_Cowbell Mar 2017 #17
Thanks for this explanation, Cowbell. elleng Mar 2017 #19
Thanks for the information. It gets complicated (and puzzling) sometimes. Vinca Mar 2017 #21
IOW, he's saying he WASN'T WRONG. He's an EQUIVOCATOR, and Shakespeare had words for such a WinkyDink Mar 2017 #20
This message was self-deleted by its author Skittles Mar 2017 #22
He is now sorry - only because it made him look bad dalton99a Mar 2017 #23
"Heartbreaking"? surrealAmerican Mar 2017 #24

LisaM

(27,758 posts)
2. This tells me that all of his interpretation of the law will be extremely narrow
Wed Mar 22, 2017, 02:04 PM
Mar 2017

and that he's willing to hide behind precedent rather than take a stand. This is kind of similar to the frozen trucker incident.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
25. Actually, Scalia ignored precedent and was a
Wed Mar 22, 2017, 08:05 PM
Mar 2017

judicial activist--whenever either suited him. Gorsuch claims, and is believed to be, a great admirer of Scalia and his rulings are supposed to be in Scalia's pattern.

The Senate should be looking for secret meetings with unidentified people in isolated resorts.

exboyfil

(17,857 posts)
4. He wasn't bound by precedent
Wed Mar 22, 2017, 02:07 PM
Mar 2017

He added the word "merely" to the decision thus warping the precedent. The precedent was open ended and looking for some compassionate interpretation. Good luck for anybody but the rich and powerful getting any compassion from this quarter.

Fortinbras Armstrong

(4,473 posts)
14. If he had been on the Supreme Court when Brown v Board of Education was decided
Wed Mar 22, 2017, 03:38 PM
Mar 2017

Would he have felt bound by the precedent of Plessy v Ferguson?

hamsterjill

(15,214 posts)
6. The one consistent feature of all of Gorsuch's rulings.
Wed Mar 22, 2017, 02:36 PM
Mar 2017

The one consistent feature of all of Gorsuch's rulings seems to be that he screws the ordinary, regular, working class person who is a part to any lawsuit.

That ought to tell everyone SOMETHING!!!

Buckeyeblue

(5,491 posts)
9. That's ridiculous
Wed Mar 22, 2017, 03:18 PM
Mar 2017

If the precedent is wrong he has a duty to correct. In this case he just clogged the system.

And even Thomas disagreed. This puts him to the right of Thomas, which is somewhere close to whackoland.

Lanius

(599 posts)
11. So Gorsuch hides behind precedent unless he's ruling on something to further "religious freedom" or
Wed Mar 22, 2017, 03:24 PM
Mar 2017

other right-wing interests?

More_Cowbell

(2,190 posts)
17. Lower courts must follow precedent
Wed Mar 22, 2017, 04:49 PM
Mar 2017

In general, the circuit courts make their own precedent unless they're following US Supreme Court precedent. Lower courts in the 10th Circuit would have been bound by the earlier 10th Circuit decision, but Gorsuch and the others had the chance to follow the 10th Circuit's own narrow reading of the federal IDEA statute, or they could have joined other circuit courts that had gone the other way (in effect, making new 10th Circuit precedent). When the circuits are "split" like this, the US SCt generally takes up a case to decide the issue one way or the other, which is what happened here.

Often a lower court judge will unwillingly follow the circuit's precedent, and sometimes they note it in the decision. For instance, in 2015 a district court in New York was forced to follow 2nd Circuit precedent when it held that Title VII didn't prohibit discrimination because of sexual orientation, because of "the line the Second Circuit has drawn, rightly or wrongly, between sexual orientation and sex-based claims."

But the judge clearly didn't agree with the Second Circuit precedent: "In light of the EEOC's recent decision on Title VII's scope, and the demonstrated impracticability of considering sexual orientation discrimination as categorically different from sexual stereotyping, one might reasonably ask — and, lest there be any doubt, this Court is asking — whether that line should be erased."

 

WinkyDink

(51,311 posts)
20. IOW, he's saying he WASN'T WRONG. He's an EQUIVOCATOR, and Shakespeare had words for such a
Wed Mar 22, 2017, 05:18 PM
Mar 2017

one:

Act II, scene 3. The Porter pretends he's at Hell's Gate:

(Knock.) Knock, knock! Who’s there, in th’
other devil’s name? Faith, here’s an equivocator
that could swear in both the scales against either
scale, who committed treason enough for God’s
sake yet could not equivocate to heaven. O, come in,
equivocator.

Response to DonViejo (Original post)

surrealAmerican

(11,339 posts)
24. "Heartbreaking"?
Wed Mar 22, 2017, 07:59 PM
Mar 2017

He's used that word before, in the truck driver's case I think.
He doesn't mean it. If he actually found his own decisions heartbreaking, he would not still be the kind of Judge he is.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Gorsuch: 'I'm sorry' for ...