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

brooklynite

(93,851 posts)
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 09:18 AM Apr 2017

Gorsuch Apparently Plagiarized Passages in Book

Source: Political Wire

Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch “copied the structure and language used by several authors and failed to cite source material in his book and an academic article,” Politico reports.

“The documents show that several passages from the tenth chapter of his 2006 book, The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia, read nearly verbatim to a 1984 article in the Indiana Law Journal. In several other instances in that book and an academic article published in 2000, Gorsuch borrowed from the ideas, quotes and structures of scholarly and legal works without citing them.”

A White House statement: “There is only one explanation for this baseless, last-second smear of Judge Gorsuch: those desperate to justify the unprecedented filibuster of a well-qualified and mainstream nominee to the Supreme Court.”

Read more: https://politicalwire.com/2017/04/05/gorsuch-apparently-plagiarized-passages-book/

62 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Gorsuch Apparently Plagiarized Passages in Book (Original Post) brooklynite Apr 2017 OP
According to berenguer that would normally be investigated for plagiarism. caroldansen Apr 2017 #1
Last second? The damn republicans are racing for a confirmation before we find out about him. George II Apr 2017 #2
What's the hurry? The seat has been vacant for 14 months. mahatmakanejeeves Apr 2017 #7
A Phoney jpak Apr 2017 #3
And then there is this.......................... turbinetree Apr 2017 #4
It's OK to cite from a source FakeNoose Apr 2017 #5
He passed it off as his own writing. Very serious breach. Blues Heron Apr 2017 #8
I agree. LVNVblue Apr 2017 #19
It disqualified Biden at one point of his career, why not Gorsuch? Eliot Rosewater Apr 2017 #28
He failed to cite. politicat Apr 2017 #29
Monica Crowley stepped away from job as sr. comm. director with trump admin due to plagiarism diva77 Apr 2017 #62
3 colleges he attended, there are links to the same 'suicide theme' for school writings. Sunlei Apr 2017 #6
Just curious: did he play any part in writing that 1984 article in the Indiana Law Journal? mahatmakanejeeves Apr 2017 #9
He turned 17 in 1984 Qutzupalotl Apr 2017 #10
Uh, yeah, I forgot that's he a young'un. Thanks. NT mahatmakanejeeves Apr 2017 #12
interesting points & there is no hurry, not sure why Republicans try to cram him through so fast. Sunlei Apr 2017 #14
Minor plagiarism doesn't get me too upset. But he appears opposed to euthanasia, assisted suicide. Hoyt Apr 2017 #11
Plagiarism doesn't get you upset? Are you serious, for a life-time appointment to SCOTUS? brush Apr 2017 #30
A couple of passages in a book entitled The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia, is not some Hoyt Apr 2017 #31
FYI: Plagiarism matters. Why make excuses for theft? That's what plagiarism is. brush Apr 2017 #33
Gonna have to do better than this plagiarism stuff to stop confirmation. Pretty much agree with this Hoyt Apr 2017 #35
Maybe it won't stop the confirmation but, why make excuses for "minor" plagiarism? Not cool. brush Apr 2017 #36
Because that it was it is, minor. I consider throwing trash on the road a bigger deal than what he Hoyt Apr 2017 #37
Plagarizing is a big deal in academia of which he is part of. And since Republicans KittyWampus Apr 2017 #40
I worked for months on the Clinton campaign and I do not think plagiarsm for a SCOTUS candidate... brush Apr 2017 #42
His opposition to Euthanasia is a much bigger deal to me. Hoyt Apr 2017 #43
Fine. I have no problem with that but why imply that plagiarism is excusable? brush Apr 2017 #44
Didn't imply. I explicitly said circumstances of his alleged "plagiarism" don't concern me Hoyt Apr 2017 #46
If he'd attributed it in footnotes, then it would not be a problem. ColemanMaskell Apr 2017 #38
I agree. djg21 Apr 2017 #39
Much better explanation of what i was trying to say. Hoyt Apr 2017 #41
There's no excuse for plagiarism. One alledged to be qualified for the Supreme Court shouldn't... brush Apr 2017 #47
Post removed Post removed Apr 2017 #49
You're ok with it. Being from the publishing field, I'm not. brush Apr 2017 #50
You have no idea. djg21 Apr 2017 #51
Lazy writing. He still should have used notes. And Gorsuch is a Scalia acolyte so I don't see... brush Apr 2017 #53
Have you read the passages in question? FBaggins Apr 2017 #54
Yes I have. He re-ordered sentences in some cases but changed them little from other writers brush Apr 2017 #55
You said that you're in the publishing field FBaggins Apr 2017 #56
"number thingies ever sentence or two?" brush Apr 2017 #57
You said that you read it. FBaggins Apr 2017 #58
Oh you mean the number thingies that AREN'T on every lifted sentence? brush Apr 2017 #59
So you were saying that he didn't make any citations... FBaggins Apr 2017 #60
A question: Why defend this Scalia acolyte, an extreme right winger who is going to vote... brush Apr 2017 #61
It seems PatSeg Apr 2017 #13
we managed to get rid of douglas ginsberg unblock Apr 2017 #16
And there is hardly anything PatSeg Apr 2017 #20
indeed, they place positive value on pissing off and offending liberals, so unblock Apr 2017 #24
Very good point PatSeg Apr 2017 #25
Plagerism is theft Phoenix61 Apr 2017 #15
As a lawyer, as a justice Friend or Foe Apr 2017 #17
Thieving judge nominated by thieving president dalton99a Apr 2017 #18
So called mainstream by so called president mountain grammy Apr 2017 #21
Mainstream? Bayard Apr 2017 #22
No kidding mountain grammy Apr 2017 #23
White, conservative, and wealthy dogknob Apr 2017 #45
Using the GOP standard... Thomas Hurt Apr 2017 #26
I heard he helped Melania with her DNC speech... Blanks Apr 2017 #27
... FakeNoose Apr 2017 #34
Shocker. Lying, cheating, and stealing can heap rewards. Solly Mack Apr 2017 #32
Just wondering could he be sued now? duncang Apr 2017 #48
Suit wouldn't be viable, djg21 Apr 2017 #52

mahatmakanejeeves

(56,893 posts)
7. What's the hurry? The seat has been vacant for 14 months.
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 09:46 AM
Apr 2017

Do I have to look up quotes from McConnell et al. saying that we have all the time in the world to do something? You know it won't be difficult.

ETA, and in not too long, thanks to those darn interwebz, which never forget anything:

Republicans are now saying 8 justices on the Supreme Court is just fine. It might work.

By Amber Phillips

April 11, 2016

Can the Supreme Court do its job this year with just eight justices? As the court's vacancy enters its second month, Republicans now appear to be saying: Sure. Why not.

The "sky won't fall" with just eight on the court. That is the headline in a Des Moines Register op-ed by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) published Sunday. Grassley was responding to a Des Moines Register editorial calling Republicans' blockade "un-American" and specifically singling out Grassley, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, for blame.

"It's entirely American," Grassley argued.

So, who's right? Or really, who's argument has the most political leverage?
....

Amber Phillips writes about politics for The Fix. She was previously the one-woman D.C. bureau for the Las Vegas Sun and has reported from Boston and Taiwan. Follow @byamberphillips

turbinetree

(24,632 posts)
4. And then there is this..........................
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 09:29 AM
Apr 2017
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/neil-gorsuch-plagiarism-book


Not only does he think it's alright to freeze to death in truck this worthless right wing hypocrite, said yes to a sexual predator.

Imagine that saying yes to a sexual predator and being on the bench, maybe he forgot something, this lets remind him of what BS principles he has when he said YES to sexual predator. And this hypocrite is "suppose" to be Christian, just like his ruling in Hobby Lobby against woman and there privacy.

And then the right wingers whine about democrats packing the court with "liberals" FU.

Where's Garland--------------"boys", why don't you follow the Constitution, that's your job description and not your Mitch McConnell (Turtle) , Chuck Grassely, BS rendition of "packing" the court with right wingers FU and the horse you road in on.

And whats really remarkable these right winger do gooder's also say yes to the sexual predator............principles, they have none






FakeNoose

(32,347 posts)
5. It's OK to cite from a source
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 09:29 AM
Apr 2017

...as long as the author gives credit to the original source, at least in footnotes if not in the text.

I don't think it's a reason to vote him down, if that were the only thing he did.
But there are SO MANY OTHER reasons to vote this guy down.


LVNVblue

(9 posts)
19. I agree.
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 11:36 AM
Apr 2017

In academia, this is a very serious offense. He would have known that this was wrong, yet chose to do it anyways. IMO all of his writings should be gone through. Again, IMO it is deceit and theft.

Eliot Rosewater

(31,097 posts)
28. It disqualified Biden at one point of his career, why not Gorsuch?
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 02:50 PM
Apr 2017

Gorsuch wants to form a club called "fascism forever"

That alone is reason why he should not have a job as asst mgr at my local 7/11 let alone SC

politicat

(9,808 posts)
29. He failed to cite.
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 03:13 PM
Apr 2017

People with tenure have been fired for this. Job offers are withdrawn. Failure to cite is massive in academic circles -- it's intellectual theft of our work product. I just wrote my dissertation 18 months ago. The writing took far less time than making sure I cited everything, even potential paraphrases. (Because anyone who writes regularly should also be reading voraciously, and most readers have magpie minds, so a turn of phrase may not be original, and that must be checked.)

This alone is enough to fire him from his adjunct position, and if he is fired from that, he should not be eligible for the highest court because it shows he's not careful enough.

diva77

(7,604 posts)
62. Monica Crowley stepped away from job as sr. comm. director with trump admin due to plagiarism
Fri Apr 7, 2017, 01:55 AM
Apr 2017
http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/16/media/kfile-crowley-out/
Monica Crowley bows out of Trump administration post following plagiarism revelations
by Andrew Kaczynski and Jim Acosta @CNNMoney January 16, 2017: 1:33 PM ET
snip
Conservative author and television personality Monica Crowley is stepping away from her appointment to a senior communications role in Donald Trump's incoming administration, CNN confirms.

The move comes after CNN's KFile uncovered multiple instances of plagiarism in her 2012 book, her columns for the Washington Times, and her 2000 Ph.D. dissertation for Columbia University. Crowley was slated to be the senior director of strategic communications for the National Security Council in Trump's administration.
snip

Sunlei

(22,651 posts)
6. 3 colleges he attended, there are links to the same 'suicide theme' for school writings.
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 09:44 AM
Apr 2017

people who plagiarize so much for the only book they publish could have plagiarized their way through colleges. IMO.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neil_Gorsuch#Bibliography

edited to add, or take some old school paper they wrote, strip off the foot notes and publish it as a 'book they wrote' so they could 'generate quick income' from 'book sales'. many Republicans use the 'book trick'. Works with campaign funds too.

Buy your own book, thousands of copies with campaign funds and give book away free. Campaign funds into your pocket as income from book sales. Can even makes best seller lists if your 'friends' each buy a couple thousand books.

mahatmakanejeeves

(56,893 posts)
9. Just curious: did he play any part in writing that 1984 article in the Indiana Law Journal?
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 10:03 AM
Apr 2017

I don't know. What I'm getting at is, if he contributed to it as a researcher or as a co-author, then all he is doing is quoting himself. I quote myself all the time.

I expect more details, including the answer to my question, as the day goes by. Until then, what's the hurry on approving the nomination? If he were to get on the Court, one side in every case that went before the Court would automatically call for his recusal.

It's one thing to find the defective transmission before you buy a used car. But once you've paid for it and driven it home, you are at a big disadvantage.

This thing might not be able to get out of R. We'd better find out now.

Sunlei

(22,651 posts)
14. interesting points & there is no hurry, not sure why Republicans try to cram him through so fast.
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 10:23 AM
Apr 2017

"call for recusal" yes they can call for recusal of a SC Justice.

From what I understand about the SC, the Justice him/her self decides to recuse or not. Not each other or any other person can order a Justice recusal. Same for retirement. Once they're in, we're stuck with them for life

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
11. Minor plagiarism doesn't get me too upset. But he appears opposed to euthanasia, assisted suicide.
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 10:16 AM
Apr 2017

I find that much more troubling.

Christ, life when really sick and in pain is tough enough. Why should we, and our families, have to suffer? Yeah, I know there is a potential for other family members to abuse the sick person. But, I think that can be minimized.

brush

(53,471 posts)
30. Plagiarism doesn't get you upset? Are you serious, for a life-time appointment to SCOTUS?
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 03:14 PM
Apr 2017

If he's a plagiarist, he's a cheater who hasn't earned it.

That's a huge deal.

Why excuse that?

Should we also excuse trump and the help he got from Putin and Comey?

Talk about a slippery slope. Just relax all standards now for high office .

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
31. A couple of passages in a book entitled The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia, is not some
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 03:26 PM
Apr 2017

major plagiarism. I will bet if you actually read those "passages" that were supposedly plagiarized, you'd find it is not some brilliant new idea stolen from someone else, simply a rehash of religious BS about euthanasia.

At some point, we have to stop grousing about little things that just don't matter.

brush

(53,471 posts)
33. FYI: Plagiarism matters. Why make excuses for theft? That's what plagiarism is.
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 03:36 PM
Apr 2017

High office, especially appointed high office, should mean high standards achieved, not thievery no matter how "minor" you think it is.

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
37. Because that it was it is, minor. I consider throwing trash on the road a bigger deal than what he
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 05:11 PM
Apr 2017

supposedly did. Again, I am much more opposed to his opposition to assisted suicide. But, when we allow GOPers to take the Presidency, this is what we should expect. Should have thought of that before 40% of the party started trashing Clinton.

 

KittyWampus

(55,894 posts)
40. Plagarizing is a big deal in academia of which he is part of. And since Republicans
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 07:27 PM
Apr 2017

used plagiarism as a cudgel against Biden, it's relevant now.

brush

(53,471 posts)
42. I worked for months on the Clinton campaign and I do not think plagiarsm for a SCOTUS candidate...
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 09:15 PM
Apr 2017

is a minor, excusable matter, and I'm guessing 99.9% of the others on this board agree.

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
46. Didn't imply. I explicitly said circumstances of his alleged "plagiarism" don't concern me
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 09:45 PM
Apr 2017

very much. His ideology does, but I doubt GOPers are going to nominate anyone to our liking.

ColemanMaskell

(783 posts)
38. If he'd attributed it in footnotes, then it would not be a problem.
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 05:37 PM
Apr 2017

It isn't just that he copied. It's that he did not give a nod to his sources.

 

djg21

(1,803 posts)
39. I agree.
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 06:53 PM
Apr 2017

Last edited Thu Apr 6, 2017, 06:26 AM - Edit history (2)

i actually read and compared the relevant passages in the two texts. There certainly were similarities and Gorsuch certainly was aware of the source material. But the ideas/facts themselves are not protected; only the expression of them is. In many cases, the ideas/facts in the two texts just don't lend themselves to being expressed very differently. Maybe Gorsuch should have played it safer by attributing the source or footnoting. But I didn't think it was as horrible as some here do. But maybe that's because I actually looked beyond the headline and news story posted to DU and read the stuff?

brush

(53,471 posts)
47. There's no excuse for plagiarism. One alledged to be qualified for the Supreme Court shouldn't...
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 09:46 PM
Apr 2017

Last edited Thu Apr 6, 2017, 10:39 AM - Edit history (1)

be so careless as to not credit others' writing and pass it off as his own.

Ibid and op. cit. are still standard in scholarly works.

Why would we want a judge so careless as to not use footnotes.

Or could it be he's unaware of their necessity?

Come on, who believes that for a minute?

Whatever the case, such a judge does not belong on the highest court of the land.

It shouldn't even be argued to the contrary on a progressive board.

Is he going to be as careless in his decisions on the bench?

Response to brush (Reply #47)

brush

(53,471 posts)
50. You're ok with it. Being from the publishing field, I'm not.
Thu Apr 6, 2017, 10:38 AM
Apr 2017

Are you also ok with his confirmation?

 

djg21

(1,803 posts)
51. You have no idea.
Thu Apr 6, 2017, 11:06 AM
Apr 2017

I think the lack of attribution was unfortunate, but not disqualifying. Working in the publishing industry, I'm sure you're aware that ideas are not protected under analogous copyright law; only the expression of those ideas are protected. I'm sure you're also familiar with the "merger" doctrine (http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/media_law_prof_blog/2006/05/merger_doctrine.html). I don't know how many ways there are to relay the facts that allegedly were cribbed by Gorsuch from the source law review article. I've also not looked at the primary authority cited by both the law review article and Gorsuch, but I'd bet the language in all three writings is substantially similar. There just aren't many distinct ways to express the factual data that was relayed by all three works.

In any event, given that Democrats have no real power to thwart the nomination, it also is somewhat meaningless.

I don't like Gorsuch's ideology, and disagree with some of his judicial decisions, but I do believe him to be qualified to serve on SCOTUS. Yes I am upset that Garland wasn't appointed, but the fault for that lies in large part with the Democrats in the Senate and with President Obama, who didn't push hard enough. I do believe the failure of the Senate Republicans to consider Garland was a dereliction and disgraceful, but again, the Dems should have pressed harder.

I also am terrified about what the next Trump nominee will look like if Gorsuch is not confirmed or there is another vacancy. Maybe the Dems should save their limited ammunition for the next fight? Gorsuch may be the best the Dems can hope for right now, all things considered.

On edit: this is what the author of the law review article allegedly plagiarized has said:

"I have reviewed both passages and do not see an issue here, even though the language is similar. These passages are factual, not analytical in nature, framing both the technical legal and medical circumstances of the ‘Baby/Infant Doe’ case that occurred in 1982. Given that these passages both describe the basic facts of the case, it would have been awkward and difficult for Judge Gorsuch to have used different language."

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/04/neil-gorsuch-accused-of-plagiarizing-parts-of-his-book.html

brush

(53,471 posts)
53. Lazy writing. He still should have used notes. And Gorsuch is a Scalia acolyte so I don't see...
Thu Apr 6, 2017, 11:35 AM
Apr 2017

how any future appointments by trump or Pence would be any further right.

You mentioned the Dems didn't fight hard enough before but you don't want them to fight now on Gorsuch?

I say call the repugs bluff. Make them change the 230-year-old Senate rule they claim to revere so.

Let's see if they have the nerve to do it, as they are well aware they won't always be in the majority.

If they do, that fact will then forever be on their record.

IMO we have nothing to lose here in fighting, in forcing them to blow up centuries of Senate tradition.

brush

(53,471 posts)
55. Yes I have. He re-ordered sentences in some cases but changed them little from other writers
Thu Apr 6, 2017, 12:21 PM
Apr 2017

Why not just credit them?

It would have been easier to just set the lifted sentences off in noted graphs instead of weaving them into patchwork passages with no attribution which implies that the thoughts were original.

Not ready for prime time or SCOTUS.

Thank god the Dems filibustered him.

FBaggins

(26,696 posts)
56. You said that you're in the publishing field
Thu Apr 6, 2017, 12:23 PM
Apr 2017

What are those little number thingies ever sentence or two?

brush

(53,471 posts)
57. "number thingies ever sentence or two?"
Thu Apr 6, 2017, 12:33 PM
Apr 2017

Examples, pls.

And why are so many defending this winger?

brush

(53,471 posts)
59. Oh you mean the number thingies that AREN'T on every lifted sentence?
Thu Apr 6, 2017, 08:12 PM
Apr 2017

Last edited Thu Apr 6, 2017, 09:25 PM - Edit history (1)

BTW, there's a typo.

FBaggins

(26,696 posts)
60. So you were saying that he didn't make any citations...
Thu Apr 6, 2017, 09:58 PM
Apr 2017

... but now it's that they aren't frequent enough?

This without seeing the text of the citations or the text that he was citing?

Okey dokey.

brush

(53,471 posts)
61. A question: Why defend this Scalia acolyte, an extreme right winger who is going to vote...
Thu Apr 6, 2017, 11:13 PM
Apr 2017

Last edited Fri Apr 7, 2017, 02:33 PM - Edit history (3)

against all progressive/liberal measures and try with the rest of the repugs to take us back to the '50s, and

black people back to the back of the bus, and where Roe v. Wade will be toast, coat hanger use will soar

again, Medicare and Medicaid will be faint memories and Social Security will be privatized?

I'm puzzled. What is that about?

And he didn't cite attribution for everything lifted from another's writings.

That's why the charges came to light.

PatSeg

(46,794 posts)
13. It seems
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 10:22 AM
Apr 2017

there is no mistake too small to disqualify a Democrat, nor too big to disqualify a republican. The double standard is bizarre and surreal.

unblock

(51,974 posts)
16. we managed to get rid of douglas ginsberg
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 10:59 AM
Apr 2017

due to pot smoking after college.

we had some actual power back then, though....

PatSeg

(46,794 posts)
20. And there is hardly anything
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 11:41 AM
Apr 2017

that a republican can do to be disqualified by his/her peers. They take hypocrisy to a new level. And Donald Trump epitomizes it all.

unblock

(51,974 posts)
24. indeed, they place positive value on pissing off and offending liberals, so
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 02:30 PM
Apr 2017

anything outrageous is actually a plus for them because they love seeing us get upset.

Friend or Foe

(195 posts)
17. As a lawyer, as a justice
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 10:59 AM
Apr 2017

It is imperative to cite your source. It's the ideal behind the maxim of "stare decisis". For Gorsuch to ignore the author of prior works is damning!

dogknob

(2,431 posts)
45. White, conservative, and wealthy
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 09:40 PM
Apr 2017

You know, like the Monopoly guy. That's supposed to be mainstream.

Thomas Hurt

(13,903 posts)
26. Using the GOP standard...
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 02:38 PM
Apr 2017

doesn't this require at least a one year investigation of the investigation into benghazi?

Solly Mack

(90,740 posts)
32. Shocker. Lying, cheating, and stealing can heap rewards.
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 03:32 PM
Apr 2017

Got another shocker for people. Crime actually does pay - often with dividends.

Just depends on who you are.

duncang

(1,907 posts)
48. Just wondering could he be sued now?
Wed Apr 5, 2017, 10:37 PM
Apr 2017

If he plagiarized sections in his book isn't that grounds to sue? Just thinking a supreme court justice going in to office being sued kind of a wtf moment if it happens.

 

djg21

(1,803 posts)
52. Suit wouldn't be viable,
Thu Apr 6, 2017, 11:31 AM
Apr 2017

It would be copyright claim. Ideas are not protectible under copyright law, and the copyright doctrine of merger would be a very strong, if not insurmountable, defense. In any event, the author of the law review article that allegedly was copied would have to bring the action, and she already has gone on record as saying:

"I have reviewed both passages and do not see an issue here, even though the language is similar. These passages are factual, not analytical in nature, framing both the technical legal and medical circumstances of the ‘Baby/Infant Doe’ case that occurred in 1982. Given that these passages both describe the basic facts of the case, it would have been awkward and difficult for Judge Gorsuch to have used different language."

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/04/neil-gorsuch-accused-of-plagiarizing-parts-of-his-book.html. Again, look up the doctrine of merger.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Gorsuch Apparently Plagia...