What 10 key opinions by Neil Gorsuch say about his judicial mindset
The conservatism of Donald Trump’s U.S. Supreme Court nominee is evident in his judicial rulings
and DAVID MIGOYA
Neil Gorsuch’s conservative credentials are evident in opinions from his decade-plus tenure on the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver.
The 49-year-old Colorado native, nominated Tuesday for the U.S. Supreme Court, is well known for his artful judicial opinions. And his orders have touched on a number of controversial issues — from religious liberty and birth control to executive authority and immigration.
Here is a look at a handful of his key opinions:
The case: Hobby Lobby Stores vs. Sebelius, 2013. The Hobby Lobby craft store chain sued to challenge the requirement in the Affordable Care Act that an employer’s insurance policy must cover all forms of birth control.
The ruling: The 10th Circuit ruled that federal law prohibited the requirement from applying to closely held corporations, with Judge Gorsuch in agreement. The U.S. Supreme Court later upheld that view in a 5-4 decision.
In his concurring opinion, Gorsuch defended religious freedom, writing that it “doesn’t just apply to protect popular religious beliefs: it does perhaps its most important work in protecting unpopular religious beliefs, vindicating this nation’s long-held aspiration to serve as a refuge of religious tolerance.” He argued that the ACA would force businesses “to underwrite payments for drugs or devices that can have the effect of destroying a fertilized human egg.”
Quote: “It is not for secular courts to rewrite the religious complaint of a faithful adherent, or to decide whether a religious teaching about complicity imposes ‘too much’ moral disapproval on those only ‘indirectly’ assisting wrongful conduct.”
Read the entire story in The Denver Post.
Support Local Journalism
Support Local Journalism
Readers around Aspen and Snowmass Village make the Aspen Times’ work possible. Your financial contribution supports our efforts to deliver quality, locally relevant journalism.
Now more than ever, your support is critical to help us keep our community informed about the evolving coronavirus pandemic and the impact it is having locally. Every contribution, however large or small, will make a difference.
Each donation will be used exclusively for the development and creation of increased news coverage.
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.
User Legend: Moderator Trusted User
Written pleadings filed Monday in district court by the Pitkin County Restaurant Alliance seek a court decision requiring the defendants — the county, the board of health and interim director — to answer their complaint by Thursday and hold a court hearing on the matter as early as Friday.