'You're a Bunch of Radicals,' Gorsuch Jokes at Federalist Society Dinner
The newest Supreme Court justice made light of criticism of the conservative-leaning group, and of himself, in a speech Thursday.
November 16, 2017 at 11:57 PM
5 minute read
Justice Neil Gorsuch tested out his comedic skills Thursday night in a speech before the conservative-leaning Federalist Society.
The newest U.S. Supreme Court justice spoke at the society's annual dinner, which has been dubbed the Antonin Scalia Memorial Dinner in memory of Gorsuch's predecessor. Gorsuch, speaking to a large, black-tie crowd in the main hall of Washington, D.C.'s Union Station, focused his remarks on federalism and the importance of separation of powers, but managed to slip in a few jokes along the way.
Democrats and liberal advocacy groups have accused President Donald Trump of outsourcing his judicial nominations, including Gorsuch's, to the Federalist Society, and have criticized the group for being secretive and opaque about its motives and level of involvement with the White House. Gorsuch made light of those accusations Thursday night.
“For starters, if you're going to have a meeting of a secret organization, maybe don't have it in the middle of Union Station,” the justice said, to thunderous laughter.
He said the society, if it wants to be secretive, shouldn't be so obvious about its commitment to certain ideals, like that it's the duty of a judge to “say what the law is, not what it should be.”
“You're a bunch of radicals,” Gorsuch joked.
Gorsuch also joked about the so-called “frozen trucker” case, which became a point of contention during his nomination.
In the case, Gorsuch wrote in his dissent that an employer could legally fire a trucker for abandoning his disabled truck after waiting in the freezing cold for three hours for help, because the law only prohibited firing workers for refusing to operate a vehicle out of safety concerns, not for abandoning one. Democrats said the case showed Gorsuch lacked empathy.
Gorsuch said the case illustrated how judges are not supposed to make law, but follow it. He said good judges often look at a statute and immediately know three things.
“One, the law is telling me to do something really, really stupid,” he said. “Two, the law is constitutional and I have no choice but to do that really stupid thing the law requires. And three, when it's done, everyone who's not a lawyer is going to think I just hate truckers.”
But Gorsuch took a more serious tone as he promised the crowd he would defend both “originalism” and “textualism” from the bench.
“Neither is going anywhere on my watch,” he said, to applause.
Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch walks down the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court after his investiture ceremony June 15, 2017. Credit: Diego M. Radzinschi/ALMJustice Neil Gorsuch tested out his comedic skills Thursday night in a speech before the conservative-leaning Federalist Society.
The newest U.S. Supreme Court justice spoke at the society's annual dinner, which has been dubbed the
Democrats and liberal advocacy groups have accused President Donald Trump of outsourcing his judicial nominations, including Gorsuch's, to the Federalist Society, and have criticized the group for being secretive and opaque about its motives and level of involvement with the White House. Gorsuch made light of those accusations Thursday night.
“For starters, if you're going to have a meeting of a secret organization, maybe don't have it in the middle of Union Station,” the justice said, to thunderous laughter.
He said the society, if it wants to be secretive, shouldn't be so obvious about its commitment to certain ideals, like that it's the duty of a judge to “say what the law is, not what it should be.”
“You're a bunch of radicals,” Gorsuch joked.
Gorsuch also joked about the so-called “frozen trucker” case, which became a point of contention during his nomination.
In the case, Gorsuch wrote in his dissent that an employer could legally fire a trucker for abandoning his disabled truck after waiting in the freezing cold for three hours for help, because the law only prohibited firing workers for refusing to operate a vehicle out of safety concerns, not for abandoning one. Democrats said the case showed Gorsuch lacked empathy.
Gorsuch said the case illustrated how judges are not supposed to make law, but follow it. He said good judges often look at a statute and immediately know three things.
“One, the law is telling me to do something really, really stupid,” he said. “Two, the law is constitutional and I have no choice but to do that really stupid thing the law requires. And three, when it's done, everyone who's not a lawyer is going to think I just hate truckers.”
But Gorsuch took a more serious tone as he promised the crowd he would defend both “originalism” and “textualism” from the bench.
“Neither is going anywhere on my watch,” he said, to applause.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'A Warning Shot to Board Rooms': DOJ Decision to Fight $14B Tech Merger May Be Bad Omen for Industry
'Incredibly Complicated'? Antitrust Litigators Identify Pros and Cons of Proposed One Agency Act
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Uber Files RICO Suit Against Plaintiff-Side Firms Alleging Fraudulent Injury Claims
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 3Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 4Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 5Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250