Know your vote. Take a look at your sample ballot now!

Neil Gorsuch

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Neil Gorsuch
Image of Neil Gorsuch

Nonpartisan

Supreme Court of the United States
Tenure

2017 - Present

Years in position

8

Predecessor
Prior offices
United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit
Successor: Allison Eid
Predecessor: David Ebel

Education

Bachelor's

Columbia University, 1988

Graduate

University of Oxford, 2004

Law

Harvard Law School, 1991

Personal
Birthplace
Denver, Colo.


Neil M. Gorsuch is an associate justice of the United States Supreme Court. President Donald Trump (R) nominated him to the Court on February 1, 2017, following the death of Antonin Scalia on February 13, 2016. The U.S. Senate confirmed Gorsuch by a 54-45 vote on April 7, and he took office on April 10, 2017.[1][2][3]

Prior to joining the Court, Gorsuch served as a judicial clerk for Supreme Court Justices Byron White and Anthony Kennedy. His work experience included practicing commercial law at Kellogg Huber and serving as a deputy associate attorney general in the U.S. Department of Justice during the presidency of George W. Bush (R). Bush nominated Gorsuch to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit in 2006 and the Senate confirmed him by a unanimous voice vote.[1][4]

Gorsuch is considered a reliable conservative vote on the court.[5] Jonathan Adler, a law professor at Case Western Reserve University, framed Gorsuch to the Los Angeles Times as "a maverick conservative with a libertarian streak."[6] In his first full year on the court, Gorsuch voted as part of a 5-4 majority on major decisions that aligned with Republican policy outcomes.[7] Throughout his tenure on the Court, Gorsuch has tended to join in opinions most with Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito more than any other two justices.[8][9]

Gorsuch split with his conservative colleagues in the 2020 case Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, authoring a majority opinion that upheld sexual orientation as a protected class under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.[10] As well, Gorsuch's jurisprudence departed from his conservative colleagues on cases concerning Native American nations' rights. In June 2023, SCOTUSBlog's Amy Howe wrote, "[Gorsuch] has arguably been the court’s strongest champion of Native American sovereignty."[11]

Gorsuch has called himself an originalist and textualist, claiming to interpret the constitution as he believed it would have been understood at the time it was written. TIME published an excerpt of Gorsuch's 2019 book, A Republic, If You Can Keep It, outlining this approach, "Whether it’s the Constitution’s prohibition on torture, its protection of speech, or its restrictions on searches, the meaning remains constant even as new applications arise."[12]

Since he joined the U.S. Supreme Court at the end of the 2016 term through the 2024 term, Gorsuch authored the majority opinion in a 5-4 decision 17 times and authored a dissent in an 8-1 decision eight times.[13][14] Click here to read more about Gorsuch's Supreme Court stats.

Some of Gorsuch’s notable opinions while on the United States Supreme Court include:

  • a 5-4 majority opinion in McGirt v. Oklahoma (2019), holding that under the Indian Major Crimes Act, lands reserved for the Creek Nation in eastern Oklahoma constituted Indian Country. As a result, the state of Oklahoma could not legally try a Creek citizen for criminal conduct in state court.[15]
  • a 5-4 majority opinion in Ysleta del Sur Pueblo v. Texas (2022), holding that the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo and Alabama-Coushatta Indian Tribes of Texas Restoration Act (1987) functions as a federal ban on gaming activities occurring on tribal lands that are also banned in Texas.[16]
  • joined the 6-3 majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022), holding that the U.S. Constitution did not provide a right to abortion.[17]
  • a 5-4 majority opinion in Harrington v. Purdue Pharma L.P. (2024), overturning Purdue Pharma's bankruptcy settlement that would have shielded the Sackler family from personal liability without the consent of creditors and opioid victims.[18]
  • a 6-3 majority opinion in Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic (2025), allowing states to block qualified health care provider Planned Parenthood from their Medicaid programs because it provides abortion procedures, even if patients do not seek an abortion.[19]

Judicial nominations and appointments

United States Supreme Court (2017-present)

See also: Federal judges nominated by Donald Trump and Neil Gorsuch confirmation hearings
Nomination Tracker
Fedbadgesmall.png
Nominee Information
Name: Neil M. Gorsuch
Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Progress
Confirmed 65 days after nomination.
ApprovedANominated: February 1, 2017
ApprovedAABA Rating: Unanimously Well Qualified
Questionnaire: Questionnaire
ApprovedAHearing: March 20-23, 2017
QFRs: QFRs (Hover over QFRs to read more)
ApprovedAReported: April 3, 2017 
ApprovedAConfirmed: April 7, 2017
ApprovedAVote: 54-45

On January 31, 2017, President Donald Trump (R) announced his intent to nominate Gorsuch to the Supreme Court of the United States following the death of Justice Antonin Scalia:[20]

“ I am proud to announce the nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch for Justice of the Supreme Court ... This has been the most transparent and most important Supreme Court selection process in the history of our country and I wanted the American people to have a voice in this nomination. Judge Gorsuch has a superb intellect, an unparalleled legal education, and a commitment to interpreting the Constitution according to its text. He will make an incredible Justice as soon as the Senate confirms him.[21] ”
—President Donald Trump


Gorsuch's nomination was made official the following day, February 1, 2017.[1]

The American Bar Association rated Gorsuch Unanimously Well Qualified for the nomination.[22]

Confirmation hearings on Gorsuch's nomination were held before the Senate Judiciary Committee from March 20-23, 2017. Gorsuch's nomination was reported by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) on April 3, 2017.[23]

On April 4, 2017, in a 55-44 vote, the U.S. Senate passed a procedural motion to begin debate on Gorsuch's nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court on the floor of the Senate. Four Democratic senators—Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.), Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.), and Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.)—voted with 51 of 52 Republican senators to pass the motion. Senator Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.) did not vote. In a related move, Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) filed a motion to invoke cloture, limiting debate on the nomination. Under Senate rules, action on Sen. McConnell's motion could not be taken until Thursday, April 6, 2017. In the interim, senators debated the nomination on the floor.[24]

On April 5, the Senate continued its floor debate over the nomination. U.S. Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) spoke for 15 hours and 28 minutes, starting at 6:45 p.m. the previous day. According to a Roll Call report, Merkley’s was the eighth-longest speech in the Senate since 1900. After Merkley’s speech ended and legislative business began on Wednesday, the Senate alternated 60 minute intervals between the majority and the minority to debate the nomination.

On April 6, the Senate failed to invoke cloture on a Democratic filibuster of Gorsuch's nomination. Sixty senators were required to agree to invoke cloture. Fifty-five senators—51 Republicans and four Democrats—voted to invoke cloture. The Democratic senators who voted with the Republicans were Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.), Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.), and Joe Manchin (D-W. Va.). CBS News reported that Bennet was under pressure to support Gorsuch's nomination because Gorsuch was from Colorado. Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) was the only Republican to vote against invoking cloture, using it as a procedural mechanism to begin the process of changing the rules for closing debate on the nomination. McConnell raised a point of order, suggesting that debate on nominations be ended by a simple majority of votes rather than 60 votes.[25]

Eventually, a 52-48 majority along party lines voted against retaining the 60-vote threshold to end debate on Supreme Court nominations, opting instead for a simple majority being required to end debate. The change—installing a rule lowering the threshold for ending debate from 60 senators to 51 senators—is referred to as the filibuster nuclear option. Under the new threshold, the Senate subsequently voted to end debate on Gorsuch's nomination on April 6.[26][27]

On April 7, 2017, the U.S. Senate confirmed Gorsuch to the Court on a 54-45 vote. Three Democratic senators joined with 51 Republican senators in voting to confirm Gorsuch: Joe Donnelly (Ind.), Heidi Heitkamp (N.D.), and Joe Manchin (W. Va.). Senator Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.) did not vote on the nomination.[28] Gorsuch took his judicial oaths of office on Monday, April 10, 2017.[4]

Gorsuch became the seventh SCOTUS justice to have once clerked at the Supreme Court, but the first to serve on the Court with the justice for whom he clerked—Justice Anthony Kennedy. He also clerked for Justice Byron White, who was the first Supreme Court clerk to serve as a justice.[24][29]


Administrative State
Administrative State Icon Gold.png
Five Pillars of the Administrative State
•Agency control
• Executive control
• Judicial control
•Legislative control
• Public Control
Click here for more coverage of the administrative state on Ballotpedia.
Click here to access Ballotpedia's administrative state legislation tracker.

Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals (2006-2017)

Gorsuch was nominated to the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit by President George W. Bush (R) on May 10, 2006, to a seat vacated by David Ebel upon his assumption of senior status.[1]

The American Bar Association rated Gorsuch Unanimously Well Qualified for the nomination.[30]

Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on Gorsuch's nomination were held on June 21, 2006, and his nomination was reported to the full U.S. Senate by Senator Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) on July 13, 2006. Gorsuch was confirmed on a voice vote of the U.S. Senate on July 20, 2006, and he received his commission on August 8, 2006. He was 38 years old at the time of his confirmation to the circuit court.[4][31][32]

After Gorsuch's confirmation, Above the Law contributor David Lat wrote, "Judge Neil Gorsuch is one to watch. He’s brilliant, he’s young, and he’s incredibly well-connected. Look for him to rise through the ranks of Supreme Court feeder judges in the years to come — and, perhaps, to be nominated to the Court himself someday."[33]

He resigned from the Tenth Circuit court judgeship on April 9, 2017, upon his elevation to the U.S. Supreme Court. He was succeeded by Judge Allison Eid.[4][31][32]

Biography

Gorsuch was born on August 29, 1967, in Denver, Colorado. Gorsuch's mother, Anne Gorsuch Burford, was the first woman to serve as Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, and did so under President Ronald Reagan (R).[4][31][34]

Gorsuch earned his B.A. from Columbia University in 1988, his J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1991, and his D.Phil. from the University of Oxford in 2004.[4][31][34] While at Columbia, Gorsuch co-founded a journal of ideas, the Morningside Review, in which he wrote, “Here on Morningside, conservatism is an undeniably fashionable whipping-boy for the world’s ills.”[35][36] Afterward, Gorsuch founded a student newspaper, The Federalist, seeking greater campus visibility for the publication and to provide "a feisty and reliable response to campus liberals," according to Columbia Magazine.[35]


Professional career

  • 1998-2005: Partner
  • 1995-1998: Associate


Approach to the law

Oyez, a law project created by Cornell’s Legal Information Institute, Justia, and Chicago-Kent College of Law, identified Gorsuch as a Constitutional originalist, meaning he believes the Constitution should be interpreted as it was originally written. It also noted that Gorsuch is "known for his criticism of the existing legal standard by which the Court reviews the actions of executive agencies, and for his tendency to favor state power over federal."[38]

In July 2019, David Savage of the Los Angeles Times called Gorsuch "a different kind of conservative." "He is a libertarian who is quick to oppose unchecked government power, even in the hands of prosecutors or the police. And he is willing to go his own way and chart a course that does not always align with the traditional views on the right or the left," Savage wrote.[39]

Martin-Quinn score

Gorsuch's Martin-Quinn score following the 2023-2024 term was 1.12, making him the third-most conservative justice on the court at that time. Martin-Quinn scores were developed by political scientists Andrew Martin and Kevin Quinn from the University of Michigan, and measure the justices of the Supreme Court along an ideological continuum. The further from zero on the scale, the more conservative (>0) or liberal (<0) the justice. The chart below details every justice's Martin-Quinn score for the 2023-2024 term. These are preliminary scores provided by Kevin Quinn that may differ slightly from the final version of the scores that Martin and Quinn will make publicly available at a later date.


Supreme Court statistics

Opinions by year

Below is a table of the number of opinions, concurrences, and dissents that Gorsuch has issued since joining the Supreme Court, according to the Supreme Court record and from the annual Stat Pack produced by the website SCOTUSBlog. This information is updated annually at the end of each term.[40][41] Information for the 2022 term is from a dataset provided by Dr. Adam Feldman, author of Empirical SCOTUS. Data for the 2022-2023 term does not include concurrences and dissents in part. Information for the 2023-2024 term is from the Empirical SCOTUS 2023 Stat Review.

Opinions written by year, Neil Gorsuch
2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019 2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024
Opinions 1 7 8 7 6 7 7 6
Concurrences 2 4 4 3 9 5 10 10
Dissents 2 6 10 3 3 9 3 6
Totals 5 17 22 13 18 21 20 22

Justice agreement

In the 2023-2024 term, Gorsuch had the highest agreement rate with Clarence Thomas. Gorsuch had the lowest agreement rates with Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.[42] In the 2022-2023 term, Gorsuch had the highest agreement rate with Brett Kavanaugh. He had the lowest agreement rate with Ketanji Brown Jackson.[43] This does not include agreements in part.

The table below highlights Gorsuch's agreement rate with each justice on the court during that term.[44][45]

Neil Gorsuch agreement rates by term, 2017 - Present
Justice 2017-2018 2018-2019 2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024
John Roberts 83% 68% 85% 81% 73% 89% 76%
Anthony Kennedy 86% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Clarence Thomas 81% 81% 80% 88% 78% 76% 83%
Ruth Bader Ginsburg 58% 63% 62% N/A N/A N/A N/A
Stephen Breyer 61% 54% 66% 66% 54% N/A N/A
Samuel Alito 83% 74% 79% 88% 81% 87% 83%
Sonia Sotomayor 55% 63% 64% 58% 52% 71% 61%
Elena Kagan 64% 65% 67% 70% 56% 69% 61%
Brett Kavanaugh N/A 70% 88% 87% 73% 82% 75%
Amy Coney Barrett N/A N/A N/A 91% 81% 80% 78%
Ketanji Brown Jackson N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 69% 63%

Frequency in majority

In the 2023-2024 term, Gorsuch was in the majority in 80 percent of decisions. He was in the majority more often than three other justices.[42] In the 2022-2023 term, Gorsuch was in the majority in 82 percent of decisions. He was in the majority more often than two other justices.[43][46]

Since he joined the court during the 2016-2017 term, Gorsuch was in the majority more than 80 percent in five of the seven terms. Across those terms, he has been in the majority for 82 percent of all cases.[47]



Noteworthy cases

See also: Noteworthy cases heard by current justices on the U.S. Supreme Court

The noteworthy cases listed in this section include any case where the justice authored a 5-4 majority opinion or an 8-1 dissent. Other cases may be included in this section if they set or overturn an established legal precedent, are a major point of discussion in an election campaign, receive substantial media attention related to the justice's ruling, or based on our editorial judgment that the case is noteworthy. For more on how we decide which cases are noteworthy, click here.


Since he joined the court through the 2023-2024 term, Gorsuch authored the majority opinion in a 5-4 decision fifteen times and authored a dissent in an 8-1 decision six times. The table below details these cases by year.[48]

Neil Gorsuch noteworthy cases
Year 5-4 majority opinion 8-1 dissenting opinion
Total 15 6
2023-2024 2 0
2022-2023 3 1
2021-2022 1 3
2020-2021 0 0
2019-2020 1 0
2018-2019 3 1
2017-2018 5 1

U.S. Supreme Court noteworthy opinions


Tenth Circuit opinions

Noteworthy events

Inclusion on Trump's 2016 shortlist to fill Scalia's seat

See also: Process to fill the vacated seat of Justice Antonin Scalia
See also: Complete list of Donald Trump's potential nominees to the U.S. Supreme Court

On September 23, 2016, Gorsuch was included in a second list of individuals Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump was considering to succeed Justice Antonin Scalia on the United States Supreme Court. In a press release published on his campaign website, Trump said:[66]

“ We have a very clear choice in this election. The freedoms we cherish and the constitutional values and principles our country was founded on are in jeopardy. The responsibility is greater than ever to protect and uphold these freedoms and I will appoint justices, who like Justice Scalia, will protect our liberty with the highest regard for the Constitution. This list is definitive and I will choose only from it in picking future Justices of the United States Supreme Court. I would like to thank the Federalist Society, The Heritage Foundation and the many other individuals who helped in composing this list of twenty-one highly respected people who are the kind of scholars that we need to preserve the very core of our country, and make it greater than ever before.[21] ”

Reaction to Gorsuch's inclusion

Discourse regarding the David Souter effect

Carrie Severino, policy director and chief counsel of conservative advocacy group the Judicial Crisis Network and a former law clerk for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, expressed a positive reaction to Gorsuch's inclusion. She said, "[Gorsuch] has a clear record of a consistent judicial philosophy and applying that in action. ... One of the real values here is he’s someone with solid record and we’re able to assess his experience. Conservatives are still concerned about the 'David Souter effect.'"[67][68][69][70]

Above the Law Managing Editor David Lat considered Gorsuch to be an inevitable potential SCOTUS nominee upon his confirmation to the Tenth Circuit. He, too, spoke of the so-called David Souter effect, "The other thing to remember is that Donald Trump, when he issued his list, thanked the Heritage Foundation and Federalist Society for their input. I don’t think they would have given their stamp of approval to somebody they thought was going to be another Souter. I think that since Souter, presidents are getting better at picking justices who don’t disappoint them.”[67]

Comparisons to Justice Scalia's jurisprudence

University of Denver’s Sturm College of Law professor Justin Marceau compared Gorsuch's jurisprudence with that of Justice Scalia:[67]

“ A predictably socially conservative judge who tends to favor state power over federal power ... a judge who, while perhaps not as combative in personal style as Justice Scalia, is perhaps his intellectual equal ... and almost certainly his equal on conservative jurisprudential approaches to criminal justice and social justice issues that are bound to keep coming up in the country.[21] ”


A January 2017 SCOTUSBlog analysis identified parallels between Gorsuch's and Scalia's legal approaches:[71]

“ With perhaps one notable area of disagreement, Judge Gorsuch’s prominent decisions bear the comparison out. For one thing, the great compliment that Gorsuch’s legal writing is in a class with Scalia’s is deserved: Gorsuch’s opinions are exceptionally clear and routinely entertaining; he is an unusual pleasure to read, and it is always plain exactly what he thinks and why. Like Scalia, Gorsuch also seems to have a set of judicial/ideological commitments apart from his personal policy preferences that drive his decision-making. He is an ardent textualist (like Scalia); he believes criminal laws should be clear and interpreted in favor of defendants even if that hurts government prosecutions (like Scalia); he is skeptical of efforts to purge religious expression from public spaces (like Scalia); he is highly dubious of legislative history (like Scalia); and he is less than enamored of the dormant commerce clause (like Scalia). In fact, some of the parallels can be downright eerie.[21] ”


Discourse about Gorsuch's abortion stance

Legal Center for the Defense of Life President, attorney, and conservative activist Andrew Schlafly also expressed concern about the potential Souter effect if Gorsuch was nominated. Schlafly penned an open letter to President Trump, outlining his specific concerns that Gorsuch would break Trump's campaign pledge to nominate only pro-life judges to the U.S. Supreme Court: “I’m worried that Trump’s advisers will pull a Souter... [Gorsuch] won't be pro-life on the bench ... because he doesn't invoke the term 'unborn child' in his decisions or public comments."[72][73][74] National Review contributor and former Justice Scalia clerk Ed Whelan disputed Schlafly's criticisms at length in a series of Bench Memos. An exerpt reads:[75][76][77]

“ But as I pointed out nearly two months ago in response to Schlafly’s first round of attacks, in his courageous doctoral dissertation turned book, The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia, Gorsuch propounds the principles that “human life is fundamentally and inherently valuable, and that the intentional taking of human life by private persons is always wrong.” If that doesn’t count as “pro-life,” then what does?[21] ”
—Ed Whelan


Elsewhere, anti-abortion activists and politicians including Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser and House Speaker Paul Ryan (R) praised Gorsuch's potential nomination in part due to his assumed commitment to strengthening anti-abortion policies into law, citing his opinions in Hobby Lobby v. Sebelius (2013) and Little Sisters of the Poor v. Burwell (2015) cases, and his 2006 book The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia that included analysis of SCOTUS' abortion rulings.[74]

At the same time, NARAL Pro-Choice America president Ilyse Hogue said in a statement:[74]

“ Gorsuch represents an existential threat to legal abortion in the United States and must never wear the robes of a Supreme Court justice. ... With a clear track record of supporting an agenda that undermines abortion access and endangers women, there is no doubt that Gorsuch is a direct threat to Roe v. Wade and the promise it holds for women’s equality.[21] ”


Media and writings

Books

Over Ruled: The Human Cost of Too Much Law (2024)

In 2024, HarperCollins published Gorsuch's book, Over Ruled: The Human Cost of Too Much Law, co-authored with Janie Nitze, a former law clerk for Justice Gorsuch and Justice Sonia Sotomayor, and a former Board Member of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB). The book posited that the U.S. government and agency officials have imposed too many laws on the U.S. without an equal counterweight of democratic accountability. Gorsuch cited governmental restrictions in response to the COVID-19 pandemic as an example:[78][79]

“ Covid-era restrictions distilled to their essence recent trends in our lawmaking practices, providing a glimpse of what happens when laws are made and remade with ever-increasing speed outside the legislative process. They offer a glimpse, too, into the different effects that ever-changing laws can have on “the sagacious, the enterprising, and the moneyed few” as compared with “the industrious mass of the people.” Public administration may have been vigorous and efficient. But it did not come without a price.[21] ”
—Neil Gorsuch, Janie Nitze


The book became a New York Times bestseller, with mixed reception from critics. Author and director of constitutional studies at the Manhattan Institute Ilya Shapiro praised the book as being thoroughly researched.[80] Senior writer for POLITICO Magazine Ankush Khardori and Washington Post associate editor Ruth Marcus criticized the book's accuracy, specifically disputing Gorsuch and Nitze's representation of U.S. Supreme Court case Yates v. United States (2015), as misleading with significant factual omissions in service of furthering the book's thesis.[81][82]


A Republic, If You Can Keep It (2020)

In 2020, Gorsuch's book A Republic, If You Can Keep It, was published by Penguin Random House. The book contained his personal reflections, speeches, essays, and his point of view on constitutional law. In it, he wrote:[83][84]

“ A judge should apply the Constitution or a congressional statute as it is, not as he thinks it should be.


How is a judge to go about that job? For me, respect for the separation of powers implies originalism in the application of the Constitution and textualism in the interpretation of statutes. These tools have served as the dominant methods for interpreting legal texts for most of our history—and for good reason. Each seeks to ensure that judges honor the law as adopted by the people’s representatives, and each offers neutral (nonpolitical, nonpersonal) principles for judges to follow to ascertain its meaning. Rather than guess about unspoken purposes hidden in the hearts of legislators or rework the law to meet the judge’s estimation of what an “evolving” or “maturing” society should look like, an originalist and a textualist will study dictionary definitions, rules of grammar, and the historical context, all to determine what the law meant to the people when their representatives adopted it.[21]

”
—Neil Gorsuch


The Law of Judicial Precedent (2016)

In 2016, Gorsuch co-authored a second book, The Law of Judicial Precedent, a treatise on the doctrine of judicial precedent.[85]


13th Annual Barbara K. Olson Memorial Lecture (2013)

In 2013, Judge Gorsuch gave the 13th Annual Barbara K. Olson Memorial Lecture, hosted by The Federalist Society. The lecture was established in 2001 in honor of Barbara Olson, wife of former U.S. solicitor general Ted Olson, who died in the attacks of September 11, 2001.

Judge Gorsuch gives the Barbara K. Olson Memorial Lecture (2013)



"Liberals’N’Lawsuits" article for the National Review Online (2005)

In 2005, Gorsuch wrote "Liberals’N’Lawsuits" for the National Review Online, an article in which he asserted that liberals and Democrats were too reliant on litigation to advance civil rights and social policy, to the detriment of the nation and the U.S. judiciary:[86]

“ This overweening addiction to the courtroom as the place to debate social policy is bad for the country and bad for the judiciary. In the legislative arena, especially when the country is closely divided, compromises tend to be the rule the day. But when judges rule this or that policy unconstitutional, there’s little room for compromise: One side must win, the other must lose. In constitutional litigation, too, experiments and pilot programs — real-world laboratories in which ideas can be assessed on the results they produce — are not possible. Ideas are tested only in the abstract world of legal briefs and lawyers arguments. As a society, we lose the benefit of the give-and-take of the political process and the flexibility of social experimentation that only the elected branches can provide.


At the same time, the politicization of the judiciary undermines the only real asset it has — its independence. Judges come to be seen as politicians and their confirmations become just another avenue of political warfare. Respect for the role of judges and the legitimacy of the judiciary branch as a whole diminishes. The judiciary’s diminishing claim to neutrality and independence is exemplified by a recent, historic shift in the Senate’s confirmation process. Where trial-court and appeals-court nominees were once routinely confirmed on voice vote, they are now routinely subjected to ideological litmus tests, filibusters, and vicious interest-group attacks. It is a warning sign that our judiciary is losing its legitimacy when trial and circuit-court judges are viewed and treated as little more than politicians with robes.[21]

”
—Neil Gorsuch


Writings on physician-assisted suicide

Gorsuch has written extensively on the matter of physician-assisted suicide in a variety of publications. In 2000, Gorsuch wrote "The right to assisted suicide and euthanasia," in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, and in 2004, he wrote “The Legalization of Assisted Suicide and the Law of Unintended Consequences: A review of the Dutch and Oregon experiments and leading utilitarian arguments for legal change,” in the Wisconsin Law Review.

In 2004, Gorsuch published his doctoral thesis at Oxford University, "The right to receive assistance in suicide and euthanasia, with particular reference to the law of the United States", that he later expanded upon in his 2006 book, The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia.[87][88]


U.S. Supreme Court amicus curiae briefs and early writings

In 1991, Gorsuch co-authored "Will the Gentlemen Please Yield? A Defense of the Constitutionality of State-Imposed Term Limitations," in the Hofstra Law Review.[34][89]

While in private practice, Gorsuch wrote amicus curiae briefs in three cases argued before the U.S. Supreme Court: California Public Employees' Retirement System v. Fezlen (1999), Devlin v. Scardelletti (2002), and Dura Pharmaceuticals v. Broudo (2005).[34]

About the courts

U.S. Supreme Court

The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest judicial body in the country and leads the judicial branch of the federal government. It is often referred to by the acronym SCOTUS.[90]

The Supreme Court consists of nine justices: the Chief Justice of the United States and eight Associate Justices. The justices are nominated by the president and confirmed with the "advice and consent" of the United States Senate per Article II of the United States Constitution. As federal judges, the justices serve during "good behavior," which means that justices have tenure for life unless they are removed by impeachment and subsequent conviction.[91]

The Supreme Court is the only court established by the United States Constitution (in Article III); all other federal courts are created by Congress.

The Supreme Court meets in Washington, D.C., in the United States Supreme Court building. The Supreme Court's yearly term begins on the first Monday in October and lasts until the first Monday in October the following year. The court generally releases the majority of its decisions in mid-June.[91]

To read opinions published by this court, click here.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Tenth Circuit
Court of Appeals
US-CourtOfAppeals-10thCircuit-Seal.png
Judgeships
Posts: 12
Judges: 12
Vacancies: 0
Judges
Chief: Jerome Holmes
Active judges: Robert Bacharach, Joel Carson, Allison Eid, Richard Federico, Harris Hartz, Jerome Holmes, Scott Matheson, Carolyn McHugh, Nancy Moritz, Gregory Alan Phillips, Veronica Rossman, Timothy Tymkovich

Senior judges:
Stephen Anderson, Bobby Baldock, Mary Briscoe, Wade Brorby, David Ebel, Paul Kelly, Carlos F. Lucero, Michael R. Murphy, Terrence O'Brien, John Porfilio, Stephanie Seymour


The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit is a federal appellate court with appellate jurisdiction. It hears appeals from all of the circuit courts within its jurisdiction and its rulings may be appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States. Appeals are heard in the Byron White U.S. Courthouse in Denver.

One judge from the Tenth Circuit has served on the Supreme Court of the United States. Neil Gorsuch was appointed to the Supreme Court in 2017 by Donald Trump (R). The Tenth Circuit has appellate jurisdiction over cases heard in one of its subsidiary districts. These cases can include civil and criminal matters that fall under federal law. Appeals of rulings by the Tenth Circuit are petitioned to the Supreme Court of the United States.

The Tenth Circuit has jurisdiction over the United States district courts in the following federal judicial districts:

To read opinions published by this court, click here.


See also

External links


Footnotes

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Federal Judicial Center, "Gorsuch, Neil M.," archived October 6, 2025
  2. ↑ United States Senate, "Supreme Court Nominations, present-1789," accessed October 6, 2025
  3. ↑ Associated Press, "Gorsuch sworn into Supreme Court, restores conservative tilt," April 10, 2017
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 Oyez, "Neil Gorsuch," accessed October 7, 2025
  5. ↑ USA Today, "What to know about Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch, Trump's first Supreme Court nominee," April 21, 2022
  6. ↑ The Los Angeles Times, "On an often unpredictable Supreme Court, Justice Gorsuch is the latest wild card," July 12, 2019
  7. ↑ Roll Call, "GOP Celebrates Supreme Court’s Most Conservative Term in Years," June 18, 2023
  8. ↑ The New York Times, "Kavanaugh and Gorsuch, Justices With Much in Common, Take Different Paths," May 12, 2019
  9. ↑ POLITICO, "Opinion | Using Math to Analyze the Supreme Court Reveals an Intriguing Pattern," June 2, 2024
  10. ↑ Vox, "The Supreme Court’s landmark LGBTQ rights decision, explained in 5 simple sentences," June 15, 2020
  11. ↑ SCOTUSBlog, "Supreme Court upholds Indian Child Welfare Act," June 15, 2023
  12. ↑ TIME, "Justice Neil Gorsuch: Why Originalism Is the Best Approach to the Constitution," September 6, 2019
  13. ↑ The Supreme Court Database, "Analysis," accessed October 6, 2025
  14. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "Final Stat Pack for the 2024-25 term: FREQUENCY IN THE MAJORITY," archived October 6, 2025
  15. ↑ 15.0 15.1 Supreme Court of the United States, McGirt v. Oklahoma, decided July 9, 2020
  16. ↑ 16.0 16.1 16.2 U.S. Supreme Court, Ysleta del Sur Pueblo v. Texas, decided June 15, 2022
  17. ↑ U.S. Supreme Court, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, decided June 24, 2022
  18. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, Harrington v. Purdue Pharma L.P., decided June 27, 2024
  19. ↑ U.S. Supreme Court, Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, decided June 26, 2025
  20. ↑ The White House, "President Donald J. Trump nominates Neil Gorsuch to the United States Supreme Court," January 31, 2017
  21. ↑ 21.00 21.01 21.02 21.03 21.04 21.05 21.06 21.07 21.08 21.09 21.10 21.11 21.12 21.13 21.14 21.15 21.16 21.17 21.18 21.19 21.20 21.21 21.22 21.23 21.24 21.25 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
  22. ↑ American Bar Association "Ratings of Article III and Article IV judicial nominees," archived June 19, 2020
  23. ↑ Politico, "Gorsuch confirmation hearing set for March 20," February 16, 2017
  24. ↑ 24.0 24.1 U.S. Senate, "115th Congress, 1st Session, Vote #104," April 4, 2017
  25. ↑ CBS News, "Neil Gorsuch confirmation vote: Colorado senator won't try to block," April 3, 2017
  26. ↑ New York Times, "How Senators Voted on the Gorsuch Filibuster and the Nuclear Option," April 6, 2017
  27. ↑ U.S. Senate, "Vote Summary: Question: On the Cloture Motion (Upon Reconsideration, Motion to Invoke Cloture on the Nomination of Neil M. Gorsuch of Colorado, to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States)," April 6, 2017
  28. ↑ U.S. Senate, "Vote Summary: Question: On the Nomination (Confirmation Neil M. Gorsuch, of Colorado, to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States)," April 7, 2017
  29. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "Frequently Asked Questions - Have any Supreme Court Justices served as law clerks?" accessed October 14, 2025
  30. ↑ American Bar Association, "Ratings of Article III judicial nominees, 109th Congress," accessed October 14, 2025
  31. ↑ 31.0 31.1 31.2 31.3 The Denver Post, "Gorsuch confirmed for 10th Circuit," May 8, 2016
  32. ↑ 32.0 32.1 United States Congress, "PN 1565 - Neil M. Gorsuch - The Judiciary," archived August 22, 2016
  33. ↑ Above the Law, "The eyes of the law: Judge Neil Gorsuch's investiture," November 28, 2006
  34. ↑ 34.0 34.1 34.2 34.3 Alliance for Justice, "Report on Tenth Circuit nominee Neil Gorsuch," June 28, 2006
  35. ↑ 35.0 35.1 Columbia Magazine, "The Education of Neil Gorsuch," Fall 2017
  36. ↑ Columbia Magazine, "MELTDOWN: How high will the water rise?" Fall 2017
  37. ↑ White House, "President Trump's Nominee for the Supreme Court Neil M. Gorsuch," archived April 13, 2021
  38. ↑ Oyez, "Neil Gorsuch," accessed August 13, 2019
  39. ↑ Los Angeles Times, "On an often unpredictable Supreme Court, Justice Gorsuch is the latest wild card," July 12, 2019
  40. ↑ SCOTUSBlog, "Final Stat Pack for October Term 2016 and key takeaways," accessed April 16, 2018
  41. ↑ SCOTUSBlog, "Final Stat Pack for October Term 2017 and key takeaways," accessed October 4, 2018
  42. ↑ 42.0 42.1 Empirical SCOTUS, "2023 Stat Review," July 1, 2024
  43. ↑ 43.0 43.1 Empirical SCOTUS, "Another One Bites the Dust: End of 2022/2023 Supreme Court Term Statistics," November 16, 2023
  44. ↑ Due to a change in the 2020 stat pack format, the agreement rate uses the rate of agreement in judgment.
  45. ↑ Due to a change in the 2021 stat pack format, the agreement rate uses the rate of agreement in judgment.
  46. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "2020-21 Stat pack: Frequency in the majority," July 2, 2021
  47. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "OT18 Frequency in the Majority," accessed July 3, 2019
  48. ↑ The Supreme Court Database, "Analysis," accessed June 11, 2019
  49. ↑ U.S. Supreme Court, Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, decided June 26, 2025
  50. ↑ U.S. Supreme Court, "Feliciano v. Department of Transportation," decided April 30, 2025
  51. ↑ U.S. Supreme Court, Velazquez v. Bondi, decided April 22, 2025
  52. ↑ 52.0 52.1 Supreme Court of the United States, Harrington v. Purdue Pharma L.P., decided June 27, 2024
  53. ↑ U.S. Supreme Court, National Pork Producers Council v. Ross, decided May 11, 2023
  54. ↑ U.S. Supreme Court, Bittner v. United States, decided February 28, 2023
  55. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, MALLORY v. NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY CO.," decided June 27, 2023
  56. ↑ U.S. Supreme Court, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, decided June 24, 2022
  57. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, Bucklew v. Precythe, decided April 1, 2019
  58. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, United States v. Davis, decided June 24, 2019
  59. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, United States v. Haymond, decided June 26, 2019
  60. ↑ U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, Hugo Rosario Gutierrez-Brizuela v. Lynch, decided August 23, 2016
  61. ↑ U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, Hugo Rosario Gutierrez-Brizuela v. Lynch, decided August 23, 2016
  62. ↑ U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, Druley v. Patton, decided February 3, 2015
  63. ↑ U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, Energy & Environment Legal v. Epel, decided July 13, 2015
  64. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "Potential nominee profile: Neil Gorsuch," January 13, 2017
  65. ↑ U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. et al, v. Kathleen Sebelius et al., decided June 27, 2013
  66. ↑ Donald J. Trump for President, "Donald J. Trump finalizes list of potential Supreme Court justice picks," September 23, 2016
  67. ↑ 67.0 67.1 67.2 Denver Post, "Neil Gorsuch: Elite credentials, conservative Western roots land Denver native on SCOTUS list," December 11, 2016
  68. ↑ The Judicial Crisis Network was later renamed as The Concord Fund, with Severino serving as president.
  69. ↑ POLITICO, "Judicial group to hammer Christie," July 15, 2014
  70. ↑ The David Souter effect refers to Justice David Souter, nominated by President George H.W. Bush (R), as an example of a justice who did not conform their votes on the Court to their appointing presidents' political leanings.
  71. ↑ SCOTUSBlog.com, "Potential nominee profile: Neil Gorsuch," January 13, 2017
  72. ↑ Phyllis Schlafly Eagles, "Coalition Letter on the Pledge for a Pro-Life Nomination for Justice Scalia’s Seat on the U.S. Supreme Court," January 30, 2017
  73. ↑ Mother Jones, "Anti-abortion activists say Trump's court picks aren't extreme enough," January 13, 2017
  74. ↑ 74.0 74.1 74.2 POLITICO, "Gorsuch pick affirms Trump vow to pick 'pro-life' justice," January 31, 2017
  75. ↑ National Review, "More Andy Schlafly Smears of Trump Supreme Court Candidate Neil Gorsuch—Part 1," January 24, 2017
  76. ↑ National Review, "More Andy Schlafly Smears of Trump Supreme Court Candidate Neil Gorsuch—Part 2," January 24, 2017
  77. ↑ National Review, "More Andy Schlafly Smears of Trump Supreme Court Candidate Neil Gorsuch—Part 3," January 24, 2017
  78. ↑ HarperCollins, "Over Ruled: The Human Cost of Too Much Law," published August 6, 2024
  79. ↑ National Review, "How Covid-19 Restrictions Created Winners and Losers," August 5, 2024
  80. ↑ Washington Free Beacon, " How Many Laws Did You Break Today? ," August 11, 2024
  81. ↑ POLITICO Magazine, "Neil Gorsuch’s New Book Is an Embarrassment," October 15, 2024
  82. ↑ Washington Post, "Opinion | Justice Gorsuch’s book of fish tales," August 22, 2024
  83. ↑ Penguin Random House, "A Republic, If You Can Keep It," published September 10, 2019
  84. ↑ Columbia College Today, ""A Republic, If You Can Keep It,” by Neil M. Gorsuch ’88," accessed October 21, 2025
  85. ↑ Thomson Reuters, "The Law of Judicial Precedent," accessed October 21, 2025
  86. ↑ National Review, "Liberals & Lawsuits," February 7, 2005
  87. ↑ Princeton University Press, "The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia," 2009
  88. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "Gorsuch on euthanasia and assisted suicide – and abortion?" March 16, 2017
  89. ↑ Hofstra Law Review, "Will the Gentlemen Please Yield? A Defense of the Constitutionality of State-Imposed Term Limitations," published 1991
  90. ↑ The New York Times, "On Language' Potus and Flotus," October 12, 1997
  91. ↑ 91.0 91.1 SupremeCourt.gov, "A Brief Overview of the Supreme Court," accessed April 20, 2015

Political offices
Preceded by
Antonin Scalia 		Supreme Court of the United States
2017-Present		 Succeeded by
-
Preceded by
David Ebel 		United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit
2006-2017		 Succeeded by
Allison Eid



Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Neil_Gorsuch&oldid=10553813"