Gorsuch made a mockery of textualism in discrimination case

June 21, Lackland Bloom, professor of law at the SMU Dedman School of Law in Dallas, for a piece critical of Justice Gorsuch’s application of textualism in a recent ruling where he offered his opinion about discrimination based on sexual orientation.  Published in the Orange County Register and Southern California News Group affiliates. https://bit.ly/2V64f0l

The recent opinion of the Supreme Court in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, holding that discrimination based on sex under the Civil Rights Act of 1964 necessarily encompasses discrimination based on sexual orientation or transgender status, is not simply patently wrong as a matter of law — but rather dishonest and fraudulent.

Lengthy dissents written by Justices Alito and Kavanaugh explain in great detail why this is so. For those of you who do not have the time or the patience to read them, let me explain. The majority opinion, written by Justice Gorsuch, purports to apply textualist methodology in interpreting this provision of Title VII. It does not do so, at least as textualist methodology has been understood. . .

Continue reading “Gorsuch made a mockery of textualism in discrimination case”