AR Response/Pushback: False, last-minute Dem smear vs Judge Gorsuch in Buzzfeed tonight

Here’s some important context that exposes the false, thin charges against Judge Gorsuch in a new Buzzfeed article posted this evening. In addition to the document included, which has full pushback, please see this top-line info and background:

April 5, 2017

The below info provides some important context that exposes the false, thin charges against Judge Gorsuch in a new Buzzfeed article posted this evening. In addition to the document included below, which has full pushback, please see this top-line info and background:

KEY POINTS:

• Even the author of the Indiana Law Journal article that Buzzfeed accuses Judge Gorsuch of lifting from is refuting the charge. In fact, she has issued a statement saying that she does “not see an issue here … 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.”

Ø  Abigail Lawlis Kuzma, Assistant Attorney General and Chief Counsel of the new Victim Services and Outreach Division of Indiana Attorney General’s Office (OAG), whose law review article Judge Gorsuch was accused of lifting from. Ms. Kuzma wrote in a statement: “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.”

• Judge Gorsuch’s books underwent a rigorous review process with two of the world’s most respected academic institutions — Oxford University & Princeton University — and raised zero red flags. Several distinguished professors who supervised Judge Gorsuch’s academic writing have reviewed the allegations and stated that they are baseless:

Ø  John Finnis, Emeritus Professor of Law at Oxford University, was Gorsuch’s thesis Supervisor for his Oxford Doctoral Thesis that underlies his book. He wrote in a statement: “[I]n my opinion, none of the allegations has any substance or justification … In all four cases, Neil Gorsuch’s writing and citing was easily and well within the proper and accepted standards of scholarly research and writing in the field of study in which he was working.”

Ø  John Keown, the Rose F. Kennedy Professor of Christian Ethics at Georgetown University, one of the outside examiners for Judge Gorsuch’s dissertation. He wrote in a statement: “The allegation is entirely without foundation. The book is meticulous in its citation of primary sources. The allegation that the book is guilty of plagiarism because it does not cite secondary sources which draw on those same primary sources is, frankly, absurd. Indeed, the book’s reliance on primary rather than secondary sources is one of its many strengths.”

Ø  Robert George, General Editor of New Forum Books, the Princeton University Press series that published Judge Gorsuch’s book, and McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence at Princeton University. He wrote in a statement: “This is a politically motivated effort to smear him in the hope of derailing his confirmation as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Judge Gorsuch did not attempt to steal other people’s intellectual property or pass off ideas or arguments taken from other writers as his own.  In no case did he seek credit for insights or analysis that had been purloined. In short, not only is there no fire, there isn’t even any smoke.”

• The information book Dissertation And Research Successclearly stated clearly, “You should cite primary sources rather than rely on and cite secondary sources.”

See below for more detailed information on these false charges.

False Allegations Against Supreme Court Nominee Neil Gorsuch by AR Squared on Scribd