Gorsuch's Plagiarism Is Worthy of Embarrassment
- Author: Carolyn Briggs Apr 06, 2017,
Apr 06, 2017, 21:55
It's because this brand of journalism is so worthless that we call them the Worst Web Site in the World.
President Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch is facing criticism over allegations that he plagiarized parts of his 2006 book.
According to documents provided to Buzzfeed and Politico, Gorsuch uses a passage from the 1984 article nearly word for word to describe a case about a child with Down's syndrome without citing the article by Abigail Lawlis Kuzma. 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. The documents could raise questions about the rigor of Gorsuch's scholarship, which Republicans have portrayed during the confirmation process as unimpeachable.
White House spokesperson Steven Cheung also denied that anything improper had taken place, telling Politico that this was a "false attack" refuted by many academic experts.
Another professor, Duke's Keiran Healy tweets that "Gorsuch's citations-at-one-remove read like a thing people commonly do when they want to look more scholarly/rigorous than they really are".
In one passage, Mr. Gorsuch used the same language as the law-journal article to describe a medical procedure, specifically, the sentence fragment "pass to the lungs instead of the stomach, eventually resulting in suffocation unless surgery is performed to correct the malformation".
The White House also provided a statement from Kuzma defending the similarities between her article and Gorsuch's book.
"The allegation that the book is guilty of plagiarism because it does not cite secondary sources which draw on those same primary sources is very wide of the mark."In academic settings, this would be considered plagiarism, albeit of a fairly minor kind. Gorsuch has written thousands of pages as a federal judge.
"I have reviewed both passages and do not see an issue here, even though the language is similar", Kuzma said in the statement, per the Daily News. Georgetown professor John Keown was an outside examiner on Judge Gorsuch's dissertation and called the allegations "entirely without foundation".
The rule change would lower the 60-vote threshold now in place for Supreme Court nominees to a simple majority. Just because you can find a few liberal professors to give voice to this nonsense doesn't mean there's any legitimacy to it whatsoever. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) concluded he "cannot support a man with his views for a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court", as he announced on the Senate floor on Tuesday.